JohnC

Any team that has a number of talented players on its roster is eventually going to have cap pressures. Tough decisions on which players to keep and which to shed will have to be made. You can't avoid it. Tampa had a roster full of talented players. They couldn't keep them all. I would rather have a robust roster that forced me to make those tough decisions rather than have a thin roster where it wasn't necessary to make those type of decisions. In a few years, I foresee the Sabre GM being in a situation where he will be forced to decide which players to keep and which to move on. The key is drafting well and having a pipeline to replace the players you can't keep. In that respect KA is doing a good job by building up our prospect pool. Vegas is not in such a good situation because they have dealt away a lot of their picks. So, in that respect we are in a much better situation.

The Lehner saga will never be over. I'm not suggesting that he is a bad guy or even a negative influence on the team. It's just that with a complicated person like him things are never simple or quiet. That's part of the package when you bring him in.

If Jack returns to form next year he will be worth he cap hit. If he doesn't return to form he won't be worth the cap cost. I would rather see him get fully healthy and become the player he is capable of being. The return the Sabres got for him was a fair return even if Jack becomes an elite player. From what I have seen of Tuch he is better than I expected and Krebs has demonstrated that in another year or so when he gets stronger he is going to be a good player for us.

If Krebs or Samuelsson weren't playing regular shifts with the Sabres, I could understand the rational for playing them in Rochester. However, as you point out that wasn't the case with these two young players. Krebs got regular shifts at wing and center and Samuelsson demonstrated that he was capable of playing as a first and second pair defenseman . Not only did these two players gain valuable experience to better prepare themselves for next season but it also gave the coaching staff a better understanding of what they were capable as NHL players, as you pointed out. And as you noted both of these players were playing meaningful roles while the team was winning and flourishing. The bottom line is both of these players will get better because of the manner in which they were handled.

Peterka may not start the season in the NHL. But if that happens it's more likely than not that within the season due to injuries or lack of production on the wing he will move up to the big club. He's only 20 yrs old. So, there's no need to rush him. My understanding is that in the last training camp he really shined, and if it was based solely on his play in camp he would have earned a Sabre roster spot. If I were a betting man I would put my money on him making the roster coming out of camp.

There comes a point when the discussion ends up going in circles. That's what happened on this topic. When discussing putting together defensive pairs the issue isn't always who are your best players but what players fit together and complement each others strengths and weaknesses. That issue/concern also is a consideration when putting together lines. I was attempting to point that out with the Dahlin example. Dahlin likes to carry the puck and sometimes on the offensive end create and force an offensive play. His partner has to be willing to be more defensive minded and conservative in order to give the primary player (A) player the space to assert himself. Joki playing with Dahlin, or anyone else paired with him, will have to play a more subordinate/supportive role (B) to the more dominant player. It also applies to the lines where sometimes you balance out a more offensive minded winger with a more defensive-minded and defensive responsible member on the line. I just don't see this as a brand new or perplexing concept to grasp. I apologize for the curtness (no pun intended) or hostile tone.

I wasn't concerned about being diplomatic.

If at this point you don't understand what I'm saying you never will. Find someone else to screw with.

It's obvious that a player paired with Dahlin is not going to carry the puck as much. In addition the player paired with Dahlin will have to be more defensive minded because Dahlin is going to be more aggressive on offense.

When ROR was traded most of us felt that we didn't get an adequate return. Now that a few years have gone by that deal looks much better with the current play of Tage. And, if Johnson, the draft pick from that trade, ends up playing for us that deal will look even more favorable. The point is that your first assessment of a transaction might dramatically change as time passes. As I have said before the trade of Jack was the right thing for him; and the trade and return for Jack was the right thing for this franchise.

When I categorize a player as a B player in comparison to an A player in the pairings, I'm looking at a player who is more of a support player who to a degree defers to the A player. And yes I do believe that Jokiharju is good enough to be in the top 4 group. Another example is Samuelsson on the first pairing with Dahlin is going to be a B player because Dahlin is going to be the more active player in the couple. I'll carry it out even further: Any defenseman paired with Dahlin is going to be a B player. Hope this clarifies the point I was attempting to make.

If the front office can get a better option for Power, I certainly wouldn't be against it. That same reasoning applies to all positions. If the Sabres could add another power forward winger like Tuch, I would be ecstatic. I'm not reluctant to bump down any player if a better option is available. My view on Joki is that I don't see him being an A defenseman in the top two pairings. But I do see him being a good B pairing, especially on the second pair.

Thanks for the research. However, the sample size for pairing with Power is too small to make any hard judgments. When assessing Joki I still see more upside. He's a young player who while not dramatically getting better is steadily getting better. I still seem more growth potential. As I said in prior posts his best role is as a B player on a pairing that includes the second pair. We all can agree that Power has come in and played marvelously. The player he has been most paired with is Joki.

Who has been paired with Power other than Joki?

I'm aware that Samuelsson/Dahlin is the #1 pair. But whether paired with Power or Dahlin as a B player in the pairing he has worked well in supporting the primary player in each of the pairings he has been assigned to. The salary attached to a second pairing player is not going to be cheap. I know we have a lot of cap space but I would rather use the money for a goalie or two. None of us know for sure how this plays out but I wouldn't be surprised it Joki ends up paired with Power. TBD.

I don't understand why Joki is being dismissed as a second pairing defenseman. My view of Joki is that he is a B player on either the first or second pairing. He's a player whose style of play and psychological makeup allows him to subordinate his game to the A player in one of the top two pairings. Both Dahlin and Power (small sample size) have played with him, and each of them thrived. Joki is not the type of player whose efficient and smooth style of play is not going to attract much attention. He will not dominate the play but what he does well is blend and work well with whomever he is paired with.

That's part of it. It also means that he will periodically, if not regularly, be designated to watch the games from the team box. He's a depth roster player who will most likely be in and out of the lineup. As you and others have noted this team is steadily adding credible depth so that when injuries do happen the impact won't be so catastrophic.

He's a utility player who will play intermittently. He's also useful as a PK.

There were reports that Anderson would have been amenable to going back home and play for Florida. Florida had no interest. There is a good chance that Hinostroza will be brought back next year. By all accounts Granato has an affinity for players who are fast. Hinostroza falls in that category. I realize that on this site Bjork often gets skewered. I wouldn't be surprised if he returns because Granato favors players with speed. And he definitely has that attribute.

What is a ZFG attitude? If I am afflicted with a ZFG attitude do I have to seek professional help? Or does that make me a functioning misfit?

It didn't take long for Taylor Hall to throw in the towel when the season became a lost cause. Some people/players are good at faking interest. He wasn't one of them.

What asset could he have gotten for what he had that he was willing to ship out? Miller probably had the most value but he was recovering from a surgery. Basically, we got nothing in return because we had noting to offer.

I say this with respect and with no antagonism intended but I don't think an infrequent poster would care whether some responses technically relate to a topic or not. And I want to add that I appreciate the work you and others do to keep this site running well. Speaking for myself I get a lot of enjoyment participating in this forum and learning a lot about hockey from people who are much more knowledgeable. When all is said and done a little disorder like a little dust isn't worth being bothered by.

If someone has more knowledge about the Taylor firing I would appreciate the added information. I think it was WGR's Paul Hamilton who stated that it was Krueger who got Taylor fired because the AHL coach made it clear to him that what he was espousing would not work in today's NHL. Supposedly, Krueger didn't want anyone in the ranks who didn't adhere to what he was promoting. The irony is that when he was fired and DG replaced him the new coach immediately took an approach that undid a lot of what the antiquated coach tried to install.

It may be unfair to Krueger to make this generalization but I can't think of one player who hasn't played better under Granato.