JohnC

When you have four different GMs and coaches you are not going to have any stability. The constant lurching back and forth in direction makes it difficult to move forward. The problem then becomes not the plan but the follow-through. There needs to be organization stability in order to have roster stability. I'm hoping that is what we have now.

He definitely sent the franchise back. The most damaging aspect of his coaching and philosophy to the game was how he straitjacketed the young players and stifled their development. When you have young players you have to have an allowance for mistakes and not create a negative environment of playing not to make a mistake. Once the coaching change was made the players played as though they were liberated. There were still plenty of mistakes but the over-thinking and hesitancy was gone.

After reading his article and other articles by people who cover the Sabres you get the sense that the organization does have a plan in place and is determined to implement it. There is no mystery to what it is. It is the standard method of building a successful team by acquiring and developing young players. It certainly is not a quick fix but it is the most reliable pathway to sustained success. The only team that I know that has short-circuited that approach is Vegas's success since its inception. That organization masterfully handled the expansion draft and was ready to compete right off the start. There is no question that the Vegas model is an exception to the rule.

Attached is a 9 min link from Sabres.com of a summary of the highlights. I didn't watch the game so I can't comment about it. It is going to be interesting to see if JJ Peterka makes the roster or is sent to Rochester to get more playing time? Based on his play he has earned a roster spot but from a developmental standpoint he might start the season in the AHL. https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/det--buf/t-277443696/c-9120174 Also attached is a 5 min clip of Granato's post game comments. https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/don-granato-postgame-10921/t-277437090/c-9119919

I don't believe that there are any worthy trade deals right now because of the questions about Jack's health status. And that issue (my opinion) is not going to be known this season. Any GM who right now would trade any of their high end prospects for Jack should be fired for gross malfeasance. Jack is a damaged asset. The hope is that he can in time get healthy and play at the level he once did. That's when he should be dealt.

You bring up an important issue that our front office has to wrestle with. I agree with you that JJ has earned a spot on this roster. But the more important issue is whether it would be better for his development if he got a lot of playing time, and in different roles, in Rochester rather than getting lesser minutes in Buffalo. I lean toward starting him off in Rochester and then moving him up sometime during the season. And the same reasoning applies to Quinn. If I'm going to error I think it would be better to error on the side of getting him more playing time at the lower level.

You are unintentionally making a strong argument to keep Jack until he is restored to health. Assuming he gets whatever surgery it is probable that he is not going to play this year. So why not put him aside and allow him to rehab and work himself back to health? Once he can demonstrate that he is back to his old form then his trade value is demonstrably greater. The notion that the fanbase and franchise has to move on makes little sense to me. For all intents and purposes he is not going to be around the team. Our players are not waiting for him to come back and salvage anything for them. KA is handling this situation smartly. He is not going to allow himself nor the franchise to get enmeshed and distracted by this saga. He already has a lot on his plate to deal with. Just let this issue go and eventually it will work itself out. It won't be on your rushed timeline but it will some day come to a conclusion. In my view patience rather than impatience will work out better for the organization.

I don't believe that any deal he makes for Eichel is about salvaging this season. For him the return needs to include a first or second line center prospect who should be ready for NHL play in a year or so. I don't want to aggravate the impatient masses here but the best strategy may be for the GM to wait until Jack gets whatever surgery and then is able demonstrate that he is back to form. That might take another year.

I disagree. It sure sounds to me that this coach was part of the "old school" world that is rapidly declining in size in this new world reality. Assuming this story is true this is a coach that needed to be shipped out and make way for someone who else who has better interpersonal and human skills. You can still be tough without having to act stupid.

I agree with you that these dinosaur coaches are a bore and are outdated. Added to that layer of antiquation is that in this era of players these coaches are ineffective, and their shelf-life is much shorter than before. But as in any field of endeavor they still exist and have to be contended with. That's life in the real world. I'm not totally dismissing Lehner's point about the improper issuance of drugs. It just seems that Lehner is indiscriminately popping off when the subject matter that he is addressing should be dealt with more focus and detail.

I don't personally know @LGR4GM. I, like him, have participated on this forum for years. There were even a few times where the both of us mixed it up over some posts. What I can confidently say is that your scathing characterization of him and what you think he said are way out of line to the level of character assassination . He has never defended ignorant behavior, especially toward people who are handicapped physically or mentally. He, like everyone else, can be opinionated. There is nothing wrong with that. The judgment/conclusion you made about his comments on this topic don't come close to accurately reflect what he actually stated. You owe him an apology. I'm not trying to be a scold. It just seems to me that your comment directed toward him is grossly wrong and unfair.

There are always a variety of opinions. Some people think thoughtfully; and others think unthoughtfully. It's like trying to sell your house after you viciously vandalize it order to make in more marketable. This so called "crazy theory" makes absolutely no sense.

And fewer paying customers. An empty building is not a selling point. Tarnishing your asset is not a great selling point.

Detroit dominated play. Our strategy appears to chase them.

UPL looks good. Very composed.

Within this link from Sabres.com is the roster listing for the Gold and Blue units. The blue unit played in the Columbus game so the Gold unit should be playing in the Detroit game. That is not to say that there won't be some intermingling of the units for this game. https://www.nhl.com/sabres/news/sharpen-up-september-30-2021--sabres-prep-for-2nd-preseason-game-detroit-red-wings/c-326457900

First I want to let you know that I am not pigeon holing you into any "anti" category. With respect to this year's goaltending situation I agree that our goaltending staffing is precarious. That doesn't mean that it is automatically disastrous. With the exception of UPL the netminders we have are short-term. This is a rebuilding team. I just don't think that the GM was willing to seek the market (if available) for a high cost or even mid-level cost for a goalie when he believes that UPL is ready or near ready to be on this roster. I believe that KA thought he would be able to bring back Ullmark. Through no fault of his own (my opinion) it didn't work out. So you move on and make the best of the situation you are in. And just because the situation is what it is now doesn't mean that a trade can't be made to shore up the backstop position.

Ullmark was a free agent. He and his agent were going to explore what the market was for him. That was the right thing for the player to do. I have read accounts that the agent wanted Buffalo to offer a longer term and more $$$ per year than what Boston offered. Is that account accurate? I believe so because Ullmark wasn't willing to sign a deal until he became a free agent and had an opportunity to see what other offers were available. In my view there are no bad guys here. The GM was not going to sign the player beyond what he valued him at; and the player went to a better hockey situation than he had in Buffalo. That's how the market works for a free agent.

This is an interminable thread. Does that mean that he doesn't get traded?

I agree with you that the deal that Ullmark signed with Boston wasn't excessive. From what I have read about the offer the agent took the Boston offer to Buffalo and demanded more term-wise and annual salary-wise. KA said no because he felt that it went beyond the value he pegged Ullmark at. I have no criticism for the player wanting more because from a hockey standpoint Boston was a better situation for him. That's life in the free agent market: The player and organization acting in their own best interests.

I don't understand your point or perspective. You are attributing the franchise's history of failure to a person who had absolutely nothing to do with its prior failures. What he's trying to do now is set a course and follow-through on it. With respect to the Ullmark situation the player was a free agent who made a decision that was in his best interest. And correspondingly the GM placed a value on the player and was not willing to going beyond what he believed his contract value was. Player movement is an intrinsic part of the hockey system. Sometimes the balance of control resides with the organization and sometimes the balance of control resides with the player. That's the system you work within.

KA made a decision with the information he had on hand. There was no guarantee that he would be able to sign the UFA player but he felt that there was a reasonable chance that a deal could get done in the offseason. In real life you don't have the ability to make hindsight judgments. The reality is that if he traded Ullmark at the deadline he wouldn't have gotten much for him because he was going to become a free agent in the offseason. So as a rental player his value would have been very limited. I have no problem how KA handled this situation.

My understanding is that Ullmark would have re-signed with Buffalo but to do so required a longer term and more money per year than what Boston offered. Adams declined the deal because he felt that it went beyond what he valued him at. That was the right decision. As you and others point out Ullmark made the right decision for himself and so did the organization.

I agree he has the authority. The point I was making, and maybe clumsily stated, is whether he has the authority or not it would be unwise to go against the medical judgment/s of experts in the field.

Even if he has the authority to overrule the recommendations by the team doctors and outside consultants it wouldn't be a wise thing to do. It's not very difficult to understand why Jack prefers his favored procedure. But that doesn't mean that it would be the right medical approach. The irony is that as the months pass by he would have been back on the ice sooner if a procedure would have been done months ago. As time goes by and as this saga continues he is putting in jeopardy the ability to be ready for the start of the next season.