JohnC

Of course you can sort out the talent on hand if you accept the obvious reality that this is more than a one year rebuild. Wanting to do something is not the same as being able to do something. There are a variety of ways to build a roster. If you get Drysdale and include Power to the mix in another year and add them to what you already have with Dahlin and Joki then you are assembling a top tier blueline. What's the matter with that?

Most people agree with you regarding the priority of the center position for the Sabres. But if a deal isn't there to be made in acquiring players such as Krebs and Zegras then you go to your next best options. Would I prefer Zegras over Drysdale in an Anaheim deal? Absolutely yes. But if Anaheim or Vegas is not going to budge in yielding one of their young centers then adding a prospective top one or two pairing defenseman such as Drysdale and a second line forward in Comtois would be a good fallback position. If one is realistic in accepting the reality that it is going to take another year or two to assemble enough talent for this roster to be a serious team then adding talent in general and then later sorting out the talent on hand is the right approach to take.

If Tuch was included in a Vegas deal with Krebs I would take a Vegas deal over the Anaheim deal. If Krebs wasn't included in the Vegas deal I would be more than happy with your proposed Anaheim deal that included Drysdale and Comtois. When you are rebuilding and are able to add pieces then you do so even if the positions are not being filled in the sequence you preferably want. The mentality should be to add as much talent as you can and then sort it out.

The one advantage of this trade is that the Sabres will be getting three players who can play next season. That would be in contrast to the Risto and Samson deals where we basically got futures. Of course I would prefer to have Zegras as the centerpiece of an Anaheim deal but if it can't be executed we are still getting two young players in Drysdale and Comtois with plenty of upside who can grow with the team. Just because it isn't the best option doesn't mean that it still can't be a good option.

We'll see.

I'm assuming that wherever Jack is traded that there will be a secondary player or two sent to Buffalo in order for the receiving team to offset some of Jack's contract cost.

Hall was being polite and not forthright. That's what you do when being introduced to the new market. I disagree with you about Hinostra's future attitude. He knows exactly what he is getting into. He's well aware that compared with the teams he has recently played for he will be given more opportunity to play.

Taylor Hall signed with the Sabres mostly because he got the rich one year deal that would allow him to be an UFA the next year. It was the best contract he could get under the circumstances that would in the not too distant future provide him with options. Hall previously played for Krueger so I'm sure that prior relationship was a factor. But it didn't take him too long to want to be liberated. And it was evident by his play. My point is coming to Buffalo was the right/best business decision for him at the time. The Krueger factor was a factor but not as much as some believe it to be.

I agree with you that most veterans with options wouldn't want to come to Buffalo. But when a player reaches the veteran status he is well aware of the nature of the business of not always being able to control one's destiny. Being in a business of frequent player relocation is an inescapable part of the business. If you are a FBI agent you don't dictate what field office you are assigned to. If you are a soldier you go to wherever you are sent. It's simply the nature of the business. Good organizations make wise decisions on getting players who are suited for their team and their location. So I'm not overly concerned about who the organization brings in because they have a sense who fits or doesn't.

I don't miss the days of Kaleta. Those days are long gone. Pat Kaleta was an earnest player who gave everything he had. In reality he was essentially a career AHL talent who was playing at a level he wasn't qualified for. I don't want any Kaleta caliber talents on this team. That's not a solution to anything. I don't expect the roster to be loaded with all-stars or all finesse players. What I expect is NHL players who are capable of playing at a NHL level and fulfilling their roles, even if it is a limited role. The Andrew Peters and Pat Kaleta type of players whose sole purpose was to create a raucous represent an era that is outdated. Thank god that dinosaur era no longer exists. Having that type of designated pugilistic player isn't the same as having a tough and grinding player on the roster. It simply is a waste of a roster spot.

Despite the fact that he didn't have much practice time to institute his style of play you can't deny that under him the play of the team was immensely better. And you have to factor in the fact that there was a concerted effort to play the young players in the system. And it should be noted that with Ullmark in goal before he got hurt this team did get some wins. Considering the challenging circumstances the record under Granato doesn't come close to illustrating how good a job he did with the players he had to work with.

Addressing the issue of playing a more entertaining brand of hockey let's not forget that last year it didn't take long for their style of play to change from a slogging style of play under Krueger to a faster paced and north/south style of play under Granato. (Which you noted in your post.) Even when the Sabres lost and were overmatched talent-wise they were noticeably more entertaining after the coaching change. Last year I literally stopped watching the Sabres. After the coaching change I was pleasantly surprised with how the team responded. It was as if it was liberated from the restrictions of the prior suffocating system.

Get some presentable goaltending added to the recipe, as you put it, and this team, shorthanded as it is, will be more entertaining. 🙂

I can appreciate your sentiments on giving full effort. In the NHL that is more of a given than not. However, success is mostly predicated on the level of talent as reflected in the NHL cup winner this year and most years. There are many reasons why the Sabres have struggled for the past half generation. Organizational and staffing turnover without question are contributing factors. But when all is said and done it comes down to talent and depth in the organization to fill in when needed. That's been the primary reason why the Sabres have struggled. I like you am encouraged with what the GM is doing. But make no mistake the franchise is going through a rebuilding process. If done smartly the process can to an extent be accelerated and the current product made to be more entertaining than a lot of the wretched hockey we have watched over the past number of years. Again, it's mostly about the talent.

Attached is a link that lists Vegas's top prospects in their system. If Krebs, Tuch and another one of their higher end prospects are included in a trade I'm fine with it. An interesting aside is that Brendan Brisson, one of their higher rated prospects, will be playing at Mich Univ. next season. If this deal turned out to be Krebs, Elvenes and Tuch I'm in. If Vegas players have to be included on top of the three I listed because of Vegas cap reasons then I still say make the deal. https://puckprose.com/2020/10/28/vegas-golden-knights-top-8-prospects-worth-getting-excited-about/

Hacks are not always wrong. Whether one is a hack or recognized in one's field when you see an ugly duckling you see an ugly duckling.

The difference between having capable goaltending instead of incapable goaltending was starkly evident when Ullmark played last year. When he played the team not only matched up but it won a good share of games. When option B had to be counted on the team stood no chance. There were so many occasions when after Hutton let in a soft goal you can see the deflation in the players. I'm just hoping another goaltender will be brought in to give support to the rest of the lineup. When you see the same deficiencies for years you don't need much insight. What you see is what you see. Nothing new is nothing new.

He and his family are very much aware of what their family has experienced. And having gone through their experiences he and his wife made the mutual decision to play another season in Buffalo. I'm confident that they know better what is right for them and their family than an outside busybody. MYOB!

Kyle doesn't need you to give him advice as whether to play or retire. That's his decision.

Why does it bother you that a player makes a decision that he feels is in his best interest? He's doing what he wants to do. It's his business and should be no concern of yours. In other words (MYOB) i.e. shorthand for MY YOUR OWN BUSINESS. He doesn't tell you what to do and you shouldn't tell him what to do. He will make the roster if he earns it. If he isn't good enough he will be back living in Florida.

What if Adams throws UPL to the wolves and he does well? And if Adams throws UPL to the wolves and he falters, then why would that be so catastrophic? He could use that hardship experience to benefit him even when he gets sent back down to the AHL.

Paul Hamilton was on WGR on the morning show talking about the goaltending situation. He said that the Sabres are going to give UPL a chance to earn a roster spot in training camp with Anderson being the backup and mentor. It's probably more likely that UPL will start off in Rochester and then get a call-up. My leaning is toward bringing in another goalie and not rush UPL. Getting a lot of playing time in the AHL helped Mitts and Thompson be better prepared when they were moved up the ranks.

Someone I used to work with got Covid. He was a former college baseball star and was vigorously healthy. He was a terrific guy with a lot of friends. He was 50 or early 50s. He didn't get the shot. He's dead.

KA is driving the bus. If a future deal is declined by Jack when there are better offers then unless an offer arises to an acceptable return (no matter who is making the offer) then you keep him. No one is going to force the GM to make a deal that he doesn't want to make.

Absolutely. There needs to be an acceptable range of return. If that threshold isn't met then keep him until there are better opportunities. I have never deviated from that stance.