JohnC

Just some quick thoughts about the game. What becomes a stark and obvious reality in the NHL is that the key to success is the quality of play of your goaltenders. The Sabres won because Anderson played well; and the Devils lost because their goalie let in a couple of brutal goals. Okposo's shot was a knuckleball shot that at the end of its course dropped off the table. Instead of flailing at it with his glove the goalie should have stayed in front of it. The next goal by Tuch was a bad angle ricochet shot off a VO breakaway. That was another bad goal let in. Both these goals were shorthanded goals. That sequence was the difference in this game. On balance we outplayed the Devils but not noticeably so. I thought VO played well. He has shown that he is not a specialist player but a good all-around player. Skinner is another player who I thought stood out. He has become one of our best passing forwards. The pass to Power when he was doing a whirly on the ground was a heads-up play and terrific! When watching the game and then trying to come up with who played well it is becoming difficult to single out players. Everyone is playing hard on both ends. There are no slackers. That collective effort is what has been impressive over the past month or so. That's players playing for one another. The player I have been watching most closely is Mitts because if he materializes as a good player that will give this team an added boost in the future. In my eyes although the point production hasn't been exceptional (it has been good) he has become one of our best two-way players. This was a player a couple of years ago who many thought was soft. Not now! He is an embodiment of what this team has become i.e. a young player who has bought in and who plays with effort. Power is going to be a special player. And what is already evident about him is his scintillating potential on offense and defense. You can already see ready to jump to the offense and then smoothly get back when the play goes the other way. As far as I'm concerned his best attribute is his hockey intelligence. It's so enjoyable watching this team play well and win. And this team is entertaining to watch. Keep it up!

Counting on UPL makes me queasy. You and others have mentioned it that his injuries may have stunted his development. I'm not sure if the best approach in handling him as a prospect is to play him full time in Rochester a little longer or to bring him up and play him up as a B goalie with less games under his belt? If I had to bet I think that KA is a true believer in the big goalie and will have him up in Buffalo.

A few days ago on WGR Biron was talking about UPL too often being flummoxed by long shots. He simply concluded: You just can't have that vulnerability at the NHL level. In that same segment he went through a list of all the goalies that KA might consider to bring in this offseason. He shredded the players on the list. The troubling reality is that the options are limited. And even when there was a good option on the list there were contract $$$ and no trade clause considerations that made the potential acquisition less likely.

If you are receptive to Anderson as your secondary goalie, then are you in essence saying that UPL should not be your primary goalie and be with the big club? My sense (opinion) is that KA will bring in a veteran goalie who can be our #1 goalie and have UPL as the secondary goalie. Speaking for myself when discussing the position I am very humble about evaluating players at this position. Sometimes the grade A player you expect to be good and who has played well in the past becomes a disappointment, while the second-rate player who has had a lackluster career and is added to the roster becomes a stalworth player for you. The players who play that position are so mercurial season to season and within-season. One way to support the goalie is to build a good defensive unit around that pivotal position. And that is what the organization is doing.

Playing under pressure when the stakes are high is so much different than playing stress free with nothing at stake. The bench response in this clip demonstrates that point.

I beg to differ. Shortly after the firing of Krueger and the elevation of Granato there was a noticeable change in how the team played. Although it took a while to get some wins, the quality of play was noticeably improved under is stewardship. This line of demarcation from futility to competitive play was before the Jack trade.

Don Granato was asked on WGR why his team was playing so well now after struggling for much of the season? His response was that for the most part he now has a healthy roster.

Don't kid yourself, this disgusting and repulsive behavior has been going on since this stadium was built. There have always been sober pigs who pissed in the sink because they didn't want to wait in line to take a proper piss. Simply too many disgusting slobs in one location! You can't shame the shameless.

As you well know I'm an avid fan of DG. It's indisputable that he has a talent working with young players in order for them to advance as players. What I find encouraging when judging DG as a coach is that the veteran players also improved under him as like the younger players. Veteran players such Okposo, Skinner (you noted) and to a lesser extent a player such as Tuch who was given a greater role all increased their production under him. Skinner is a dramatic example of his deft touch with an individual player. The coach with the cool blue framed glasses worked on improving this free floating veteran player whose psyche was badly wounded due to the bashing from his former coach. I personally thought that Okposo was a punched out veteran player who was rapidly fading to the end of his career. I was stupendously wrong about this prideful player. The central issue now when evaluating Granato becomes how does he handle a more robust and finished roster and competes for a playoff spot. As you have spoken about before there is a difference when coaching and playing when there is nothing at stake compared to when each game means something when seriously vying for the playoffs. Playing/coaching with little expectation and little to lose in every game is not a pressurized situation. When he and the team are under the stress of battling for a playoff spot that's when we can give a more encompassing and meaningful view of him as a coach.

The choo choo train that you are riding on is the same one I am riding on. I'm hoping that the goalie issue is a priority for him this offseason. I'm attaching a link from the Buffalo News that addresses this issue. https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/inside-the-sabres-questions-in-goal-loom-large-with-prospects-going-back-to-school/article_b2da8cc2-be58-11ec-b96b-bbf8502aa148.html

I simply have a different take on KA's first year. KA was not part of the hockey operations when he was hired to be the GM to replace the fired Botterill. So, he was not entering the job as a hockey strongman who had the authority to do what he wanted to do. I strongly believe (opinion) that Krueger and/or Pegula (as @Curt stated) were influential when KA took over as a GM in the hockey operation. If you recall this franchise was in turmoil and was not a typically run franchise. The owner was very involved in the decisions. The new GM didn't have the influence that he does have now. He had to bide his team and convince the owner to allow him to follow a rebuilding course that he was advocating for. There were also some reports (speculation) that the owner wanted Krueger to finish out the year because he was tired of paying off contracts for people who were no longer working. The team's disastrous descent gave the GM more than enough ammo to convince the owner to fire Krueger sooner rather than later. So I'm going to be more lenient than you are when assessing KA's performance in his first year because the situation that he took over was more convoluted and complicated than with other more normally run franchises. Again, that's my opinion.

You are correct that Reinhart would have signed a long-term deal years before if it were offered to him. He said so. But in typical fashion the organization blundered by not offering/signing him to a long term deal when it had an opportunity to do so. After that, when his contract was running out he made it known that he when he got to his UFA status he was going seek other opportunities. When an organization consistently makes bad judgments they predictably lose more than they win.

If Krebs wasn't added to the Jack deal I doubt that a deal with Vegas would have been made. It's understood that this youngster needs to get stronger but as a Sabre he is a keeper.

Too much conspiracy thinking for my taste. You are starting to frighten me.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. KA did have a plan when he first got the job. But the problem is that the owner did not agree to it. Eventually the owner did.

Players such as Krebs and Samuelsson are benefiting more from a developmental standpoint playing with Buffalo than if they were in Rochester helping the team to make a playoff push. As @dudacek stated Rochester is there to serve the needs of the Sabres and not vice versa.

Another distinction he had in comparison to previous GMs is that right from the start he had a blueprint that was appropriate for our franchise at the particular time. He believed in his rebuild strategy and has adhered to it. There were no deviations from it for a quick fix even when this team was facing turbulence. And it is my opinion that his most consequential move was the hiring of Granato to guide his young ship. He was the right coach for the time, circumstance and for the players he was presiding over.

https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/local/senator-chuck-schumer-calling-on-federal-government-to-help-save-uss-the-sullivans/71-f2aa3993-cb09-458f-b3bc-c5c8cc8c81e6

Both of us are agreeing that both parties in this divorce wanted a separation from each other. There was no secret on what each's preference was. When KA assumed the GM position, he wanted to enact a major overhaul of the roster that involved jettisoning the former core that included Jack, Reinhart and Risto. Each of these three made it known to the organization that they wanted out. It was not a secret that both Risto and Reinhart were not going to re-sign when their contracts expired. However, as you pointed out the owner was not on board to that dramatic remake of the roster at that time. To KA's credit he handled the situation with a great deal of dexterity and diplomacy when dealing with the owner. He bided his time and let the situation disastrously unfold as he expected it to. Once the team plunged into the abyss in Krueger's second year the owner was convinced that the rebuild strategy that the GM was calling for was the right thing to do. And it certainly was an appealing factor for the owner that the payroll was going to be significantly slashed if KA's rebuild plan was implemented. During this changing of direction KA spoke on numerous occasions on WGR on what his vision was for this troubled franchise. His model was Carolina when it won the SC. He stated that he wanted to remake the roster so that it didn't center around a star player but rather he wanted to broaden out the talent so as not to become so dependent on any one player. In the end what Jack desired is the same thing that KA desired. As I have repeatedly stated the trade of Jack worked out well for him and it helped to accelerate the rebuilding and restructuring of the roster. Overall, I credit KA for doing a good job in systematically accomplishing what he set up to accomplish. And as like you my biggest criticism of him is how he handled the goalie situation. It wasn't so much not signing Ullmark to a new contract as it was not having an adequate fallback position if it a deal couldn't be worked out.

A line composed of Asplund/Gerg/Okposo would be an excellent fourth line. This would be more of a stopper than a scoring line. If you can get somewhere in the range of Okposo scoring 15 goals and Asplund and Gergs in the 10-12 range, I wouldn't be bothered with their lack of scoring potency. And every once in a while you can move Okposo up to a higher line for him to be given more scoring opportunities. As far as the face-off deficiency sometimes you just have to live with a deficiency in order to benefit for what they give you in other aspects of the game.

Assuming he returns to health I consider him to be an elite player but not generational.

I have made this comment on numerous postings. Jack being traded was the right thing for him. The organization trading Jack and getting a good return was the right thing to do for the organization. It worked out for each party. As far as Jack's long-term health that has yet to be determined.

Jack made it known to Adams that he wanted out. I don't believe that it really distressed Adams that much because he wanted to do a major rebuild as soon as he took over. My understanding is that Terry Pegula was hesitant about a clean-slate type of rebuild. Jack making it clear to Adams that he didn't want to be here simplified things for him as far as moving on.

I'm not trying to be flippant or dismissive. But the Jack comparison to Tage is an easy call for me. I'm not talking about the current Jack who is not close to being the same player as he previously was due to the surgery. I'm hoping that with an offseason he returns to full health and form. The situation that Jack was subjected to here was from an organizational standpoint tumultuous. How many different coaches did he play for? There were too many short-term transactions that were made that ended up setting this franchise back even more. It was a bad situation and he longer wanted to be a part of it. Just like ROR, Reinhart, Risto, McCabe, Montour etc. In any rebuild (in any sport) the organization has to determine who wants to be a part of it and who doesn't. He didn't want to undergo it. He felt that his career was being squandered and his mind-set focused on being somewhere else. Many people are upset with him for having that self-preservation/best interest attitude but I'm not one of them. The GM recognized it and made a decision to move on and start afresh. There were reports that he wanted to start the rebuild a year sooner but couldn't convince the owner to go along. In the end both sides on this issue/divide got what they felt was reasonable in the trade. I miss @Thorny also. You didn't have to always agree with him to recognize that his points were valid and well reasoned. On the issue of the organization and its commitment to win he had plenty of scathing comments to offer. Again, the Jack and Tage comparison is not a difficult issue for me. However, it would have been interesting to see how a healthy Jack would play under Granato. That shipped has long sailed off.

I did answer your question but you are not receptive to it because you are too invested in your hostility to the player. Jack's lack of success can be attributed to the gross dysfunction if the organization, team talent and coaching. There was a multiplicity of factors why the team he was on failed to succeed.