JohnC

Excellent analysis and summarization. As you well know, the military historians have feasted on the issues that you noted about the abilities of the generals and battlefield strategies. As you point out, there was no question that Lee was recklessly bold in his attempt to get a win, as much for political purposes as for military reasons. He was determined to get a knockout blow in the north with the hope that it would have a demoralizing political effect. Looking back, the union flanks held, although close to being breached, and pummeled Lee's major force in the middle. As I stated before, although being battered, the rebs did have a breakthrough at the triangle (middle) but didn't have enough manpower to follow through. As brutal the Gettysburg Battle was, Antietam was even more brutal proportionally per day and location. McClellan was the union general. Many historians believe that if he would have been more aggressive sooner, he could have dealt a decisive blow to Lee and his forces. Allowing Lee to escape over the Potomac River in the night allowed the Confederates to head back south and regroup. Maybe??? if McClellan could have destroyed Lee's army to a greater extent, Gettysburg would not have happened. There is any interesting parallel regarding the military and hockey franchises. It relates to getting the right people in place to lead. If you get that wrong, you fail. The Sabres are a classic example of that.

Grant was not noted for his strategy. He was a fighter who sought engagement. That was the reason why Lincoln after going through a number of generals belatedly settled on him. He got tired of his generals being too timid. Grant's philosophy was that if I have three soldiers and you have two, I could fight you to a draw and win based on the advantageous numbers. Butchery at a frightening level. In some respects, what is going on in Ukraine in their war for survival with Russia is similar. Putin is an evil person who is a combination of Stalin and Hitler. For Putin, his mindset is that I got the greater numbers, so casualties mean more to the opposition than to me. Evil personified!

Is Byram more talented than Mitts? Probably so. But from a roster construction standpoint and team need, Mitts would have added more value to this roster. (My opinion.) What happens if Byram decides that he doesn't want to be stuck in this pitiful situation and decides he wants out like Eichel, Reinhart, ROR and others did? His trade value is diminished and if he doesn't sign, then it is another player departure with little value in return. What happens if Zucker and Greenway decide that they also want out and decline to sign here as their contracts expire? It's like taking three steps back, and then one step forward. Going backwards certainly doesn't move you forward. This is another example among many where a shambolic organization performs stupidly!

I've been to Gettysburg a number of times and listened to a number of presentations. Johnny reb did actually penetrate the line but had nothing in reserve to follow up. As far as Little Round Top, if the Union reserves would not have shown up to buttress the line on the hill, the Rebels would have taken that hill. Gettysburg is both a fascinating to visit and a hallow place to respect. The butchery that both sides were subjected to were incredible. General Lee is a revered figure in the south. However, his miscalculations on that Battlefield got a lot of his soldiers unnecessarily killed and maimed. In this case, judicious non-engagement would have been better than reckless aggressiveness.

The impenetrable owner has succeeded in destroying a franchise and obliterating the fanbase. He should be ashamed of himself. When it gets to the point that following this flailing team becomes more of an aggravation than an enjoyable endeavor then it's time to take a sabbatical. This franchise has become a theatre of the absurd. It makes no freaking sense.

The Sabres win 5-2.

The difference between the Caps and Sabres is that the Caps over the past couple of years made a number of mid-level transactions (no blockbuster deals) that made their roster more well-round and tougher to play. They exhibited a level of competency that doesn't exist with the Pegula regime. Now, they likely will make the playoffs, and it won't be considered a fluke.

Let's just win this game and walk away with a taste of positivity. Being negative is exhausting.

Your post is illuminating and stupendously depressing. The Pegula era has made me mad. It's so outrageously stupid.

https://bandits.com/bandits-survive-dogfight-in-win-over-toronto-rock/ If the Sabres can become a serious team the arena would be rocking and rolling with capacity crowds as it is when the Bandits play.

The Sabres have been a generational failure because of the accumulation of bad decisions they have made. You point out that the Leafs and Tampa have kept their stars. Let's not forget that we had stars such as Eichel and Reinhart. Both of them desperately wanted out because they knew that they were stuck in a losing system. I attribute this franchise's systemic failures to its systemic incompetence. When they both ended up with seriously run franchises, both of them ended up hoisting the cup. When you constantly shoot yourself in the feet with bad decisions, you will badly limp along for a long time.

Any deal that sends Power out is a deal I'm adamantly against.

When it comes to the prediction game, put your money $$$ on the unexpected. The hockey season is a roller coaster. Your team can go on an unexpected glorious run followed up by a gut wrenching inglorious losing streak. The shame of this season is that our extended losing streak has infected the rest of the season. Simply being mediocre would have kept this team in the hunt. The moral of the story: When you shoot yourself in the foot, you can't run well for a long time. How this season transpired is so stupid---and to make it worse self-inflicted.

I'm not devaluing Cozens as much as others. No question, that he has been disappointing relative to most of our expectations. But I have noticed an uptick in his play with him playing on a line with better players. My general philosophy with this roster is that I would rather add players such as Zucker and Greenway to not only better balance out the roster but also make it a tougher team to play. My approach leans toward not shipping players out and thinning out the roster for a prize player. I would rather have a thicker and tougher lineup.

The Pegula cheer them up speech inspired the wrong team in Montreal. Ever since they have been on fire. 😀

Would you be willing to exchange Quinn, Cozens and a high-end prospect for him? I wouldn't. And adding on his high salary would also limit future player options. And @dudacek made a persuasive point that although he is an elite player, his style of play isn't the style of play that Ruff is trying to establish here. I would rather add a Zucker and Greenway type players to better round out and toughen out the roster.

I don't understand your reasoning related to playing time. There is more than plenty of playing time for your top three young defensive players. And you are not factoring the reality of injuries in a long and grinding season. The both of us are riding in two different trains going in the opposite direction on this blueline issue.

Any way you want to look at that play, it was a good play for a couple of reasons. Did McCleod pass or shoot??. It doesn't matter. The shot/pass was toward the net, and Benson was going to the net. Was it a fluke goal? Maybe. That's hockey. I'll take the goal and not worry about the aesthetic of the play.

Trading an emerging player such as Power out of frustration with the current situation is in my view taking a step backwards, as it was with the departures of Eichel and Reinhart. It's not an issue for me that I am satisfied with the status quo. If you have read my posts correctly you would realize that my distaste for KA is that he didn't do enough this past offseason. Could we have added another Zucker like player to this roster? I believe that it would have been doable. Could we have added a veteran and more rugged defensive/defenseman to the blueline unit? Again, I believed that it was doable. I'm not in your camp of dramatically blowing things up, at least not to the extent you seem to be proposing. I just think a few more smart moves would better augment what we now have and provide a better support system for the young players that this regime is apparently invested in. Side note: I like Byram more than you do. Partnering him with Dahlin makes a lot of sense to me. Will he require a rich and extended contract? Yes. The market price for a first pairing defenseman is high. If you have to pay the market rate, you do so.

It isn't a dilemma or a problem to have what in the short term might be an excess in talent and capable players to form multiple good lines. Players such as Thompson, Cozens, Kulich and Zucker etc. can play both the wing and center spot. Also, injuries are an inescapable part of the game. Not only do players get knocked out of games due to injuries but sometimes they play with an injury where moving a player to wing makes sense. Thompson and Cozens are an example of that position flexibility. When you have an adequate supply of players that allows you to assemble not only two top lines but gives you the benefit of assembling a good third line that will provide you more secondary scoring. And that is a good thing.

If the Sabres trade Power, they should fold up and get out of the business. That would be foolishness at an exponential level. I don't know where your animus comes from regarding this player. What you see is the opposite of what I'm seeing. Would it be inappropriate to recommend that you make an appointment with an optometrist? Your vision has become very jaundiced. Prescribed eyedrops should be able to correct the distorted vision.

McLeod was able to score a deflection goal off a defender because the defender was tied up with Benson who went to the net. We need more of that. Both Zucker and Benson excel in the tough areas around the net.

I would also like to add a bona fide elite hockey player to the roster. However, I just don't see our timid GM making such a bold move. The challenge of acquiring an elite player is the likely quantity of young players and assets required to consummate such a deal. I'm with you that I would be ecstatic if we can add a Zucker like talent to our roster. That seems more doable. The issue now with Zucker is whether we can retain him. I really hope so. Also, I would love to be able to retain Greenway. Both players add an element of toughness that this roster lacks.

Your cogent comment on his style of play suggests that he doesn't fit with how the organization is trying to construct the team. I would rather add another Zucker and Greenway type of player instead. It would be less costly and more doable.

You may be forgetful but your wife isn't. I support your wife. Just shut up and say yes dear. And also include that she deserves the Medal of Honor for putting up with my BS. 😁