JohnC

There was a game in which Ray was broadcasting in which he showed on a replay how far away JJP was from the player he was supposed to cover who easily scored. JJP was so lackadaisical in his coverage that I thought Ray was going to lose it when he commented about it on the replay. It was a blatantly irresponsible play. I like Byram a lot. But if you deal off both JJP and Byram, the return should be pretty good. Maybe enough return contributing to a large extent in reshaping this roster for the better. Is our GM up to the task of getting a good enough return? I'm not confident about that. As others have stated, what happens if Dahlin, Tage and Tuch say I have enough! The owner created a toxic franchise, and the understandable result will be that players no longer want to be around the revolting stench.

I’m adamant on my position on not trading Power regardless of the return. I believe that in the not too distant future m he will be an anchor defenseman. I’m tired of seeing our players on other teams thriving somewhere else.

I very much do comprehend the difference between doing something and having something work. That's my issue! When you have made decisions for a full generation and nothing has worked during that extended period, then don't you think that it's time to change your approach? We're at the point where we are going in never-ending circles. So there is no need to continue on with this futile back and forth. I say this with no disrespect intended but your responses make no sense to me. Your reasoning is so contradictory that it is incomprehensible, at least to me. But that's okay. I'm sure my responses make little sense to you. We are riding on different buses going to different destinations and our paths will not cross. So be it.

I doubt that KA will trade Power. And it would be the right decision. The next issue is what can he get in return for Byram? If you can get a solid return to improve the team and better balance the unit, then do it. The player that I have my eye on is K'Andre Miller from the Rangers.

That's like saying the only thing I did wrong is shoot the gun and have the bullet hit the person I was arguing with squarely in the head. Your defense then becomes it wasn't my fault that this so-called victim didn't have a head hard enough for the bullet to bounce off of. I'm not trying to ridicule or be mean-spirited, but your logic eludes me. And the argument that the owner does care is irrelevant. The issue is whether TP, during his tenure as an owner, has made enough good decisions that help the team win. The accumulated record for the past generation indicates no.

You and I are riding on the same bus. The main source of this franchise's failure is the owner. Blunder after blunder. Opportunities existed for him to get this franchise back on course. He selected the wrong people for critical positions, and it has haunted this franchise. We have a stubborn owner who didn't own his own limitations yet continued to make wrong decisions. It gets tiresome.

I hope so. There is some speculation that former Sabre, Rick Dudley, might be selected for an oversight position here. If that is the case then what will be the power dynamic with our current GM if he is retained, as I expect?

I agree with you that how the goalie issue was addressed did a lot of damage. I'm sure you are aware of I'm a harsh critic of KA. But in the Ullmark situation I'm somewhat sympathetic to him for how the Ullmark situation ended. I really believe that the Ullmark camp indicated to him that he was going to sign. The mistake the GM made was not having a fallback position if the UFA didn't sign. Compare our situation with the Washington Capitals? They revamped their goalie position by acquiring Logan Thompson and Lindgren on relatively cheap deals. A little imagination and aggressiveness in addressing weaknesses can go a long way. Our GM has to make it a priority to address this position this offseason. That's an imperative! And as you point out with your incisive observation about the Ullmark scenario, good goaltending can compensate for other deficiencies. And bad goaltending sabotages a lot of your good works.

The GM's judgment on both of his young netminders was off the mark. The timetable for them to be ready was too ambitious. He left the team too exposed/vulnerable in the most important position. He should have had a just in case backup plan. He took a miscalculated gamble and lost. And you can carry off the same misstep with the other younger players in over-rating their readiness. There simply wasn't enough backup veteran support just in case the development of the young players didn't meet the expected accelerated timetable. His error in judging his own roster affected how much he would do in the prior offseason to augment this young roster. One mistake cascading into additional mistakes. As the record demonstrates: It takes a toll.

The repeating mistake is that the people who drove you into the ditch are now expected to drive you out of the ditch. This was the offseason where the owner's focus right after the season concluded should have been on finding the right Head of Hockey Operations and a new GM. The stubborn owner seemed to be flummoxed to the point of being frozen. It's a sad state of affairs.

As I see it, the enforcer addition isn't our biggest need. It is finding tougher players who play more physically. What I would love to get is another Zucker-like player or two, only younger, and have a better balance between finesse/skill players and hard-nosed players. Greenway doesn't fight much but he is a presence that influences how the opposition reacts to our players. The same imbalance in unit construction applies to our blue line. Adding a couple more rugged defensive-minded blueliners would also give us a better group to handle the rigors of NHL play, especially in the defensive zone. The style of play in the playoffs gets a lot tougher and tighter compared to regular season play. When watching post season games it is evident that the way our team is built couldn't handle the rigors of playoff hockey. The more critical issue is not so much as adding talent but adding the right mix of talent to the team. As an example, I like Byram a lot but would be willing to trade him for the Rangers' K'Andre Miller. Although I believe that Byram is the more talented player, Miller would be more valuable for us because he adds something that this team lack.

The unknown for me is the relationship between the Senior Advisor and the GM. What is the power balance when there is a difference of opinion on players and other issues such as contracts? Whose voice will be more influential if an issue is brought to the owner, whether he wants to stay engaged or not. There certainly could be a lot of upsides for the GM to have a wise sounding board to discuss issues with. Who has the last say? In general, I would think that the GM would be the final authority, but I'm not sure it would be so in this case because our GM has lost some stature due to his performance in office.

Without a doubt, there are rugged defenders than can be puck carriers. However, their acquisition costs are much higher (if available) than a more conservative defender in his zone. In my view, we need maybe two of those more physical defenders to recast the unit. And those type of players should be more attainable than the more valued rugged defender who can carry the puck. For the most part, we're not disagreeing here. The issue is what more doable. We have a good asset in Byram. I like him a lot but we need to remold the blueline to better balance out the unit. When you have an overlapping asset then use it smartly to fill a need.

If you believe that the Russian will be contributing in a year or so, I would say no. I would rather trade Bryam for some immediate help on the blueline, a defenseman who has different attributes (rugged) than a puck carrying defenseman. With the assets that this organization has there are no excuses for not adding two defensemen to the unit that change the character of it. And it should be noted, contrary to the group thinking here I would prefer keeping Samuelsson. At least for now.

Terry and his non-meddling. Hire the right people, empower them and stay out of the way. A recipe for success.

The issue here isn’t bringing in similar styled players. I agree that there needs to be a different mix. We can still refashion the defense corps without letting these two young defensemen go. I recommend patience. It will pay dividends.

It was enjoyable watching the fans having a great time. It seemed that every adult had a beer in their hand. They were really into the game. Compared to the lacrosse fans the hockey fans have been cheated.

They will then turn it on. Hurry up and go! 😀 He was the MVP in this game.

Stop watching; you are jinx.

Bandits are cooking. Fans in a frenzy!

I do like Byram a lot. However, he's an asset that can be dealt and used to better round out the unit. I would be very receptive for a Byram to the Rangers for K'Andre Miller. Would this trade be an equal value deal from a talent standpoint? No. Byram is the more talented player, in my opinion. However, acquiring this big, rugged defenseman would better round out the unit. And as you point out with Bernard Decker and I noted with Samuelsson, most often there is a time lag for players to become good defenseman. It's a tough position to play. My same reasoning applies to the Power critique. Be more patient and the talent will be more actuated.

The more telling indicator is the number of players who have Buffalo on their no trade clauses. Pro players are competitive by nature. A franchise that can’t qualify to make the playoffs in nearly a generation certainly makes this location less appealing for many players if given a choice. It need not be that way because this location does have many attractive assets.

If the organization can get it together and be a relevant team this would be an appealing destination for a lot of players, of course not all. One of the biggest advantages that Buffalo has is its proximity to southern Ontario and Toronto, an area where many players come from and reside in the offseason. Right now, our reputation for dysfunction is deeply ingrained and acknowledged in the hockey world. The only way that this accurate perception is going to change is for this franchise to be run more professionally. The owner has to show more urgency that he will do what he has to do to turn things around and make this franchise more appealing.

I'm with you on not giving up on Samuelsson. There's no question that he has struggled and not played up to his prematurely rewarded contract. But as you point out, it's not unusual for it to take time for defenseman to find their game. He's had to contend with a series of injuries that have set him back. I thought when paired with Dahlin at the end of the season that he played solidly and consistently. He's a target of scorn because he didn't intervene on a Dahlin hit. He was internally held to account and seemed to be chastened after that. I'm not sure what pairing he will be slotted in but I do see him maturing and finding a role suitable for his style of play that relies on skating and moving the puck forward. He's not a banger and never will be. He needs to be placed in a role that is in accordance to his best assets, not his worst assets.

Does Dudley still live in western NY?