JohnC

I know what you are saying and I'm not trying to distort what your point is. It makes sense. But for those who give the Rex comparison the reality is that the owner hired a known failed huckster in the league because he was more interested in getting attention for his nondescript franchise instead of doing what was required to rebuild a middling franchise. He tried to take the short cut and PR route instead of the more substantive route. What Pegula has learned with the McDermott hire is that substance trumps obnoxious style. The Rex hire was not simply a bad hire it was always a weird hire. When all is said and done the loud coach outhustled the befuddled owner and ended up pocketing a lot of money for his short and indistinguishable stint. If the owner wants to blame anyone for that setback he needs to look in the mirror. To his credit he corrected his own mistake and the rest is history.

I'm not looking at individual games to support or not support my position on Granato. What is evident to me from an overview standpoint is that he took a roster that was grossly underachieving and whose confidence was lost and in short order changed that negative dynamic. There isn't a player on this roster that isn't playing better under him than under Krueger. Without much practice time he has altered the style of play and he has instilled confidence in a demoralized team he took over. In my view he has earned a new contract to be the next HC.

Coach McDermott was not inexperienced. He had extensive experience in the league in a variety of roles before being hired as a HC. He was a student of the game and was prepared to be a HC when he was hired. A number of teams were interested in him as a candidate for a HCing position. The same scenario applies to Granato. He has had a long and varied history in hockey in all segments of the business both in the pro and amateur ranks. And as an interim coach he has quickly demonstrated that he knows how to take an underachieving roster and a dispirited team and in short order dramatically turn things around. If you consider this interim stint as part of the interview process he has aced the test.

I'm not, and I'm sure Wawrow is not, arguing to keep on failed staff. I have nothing but harsh criticism for the owner tolerating such a long non-winning streak under Krueger. That's on the owners! What was worse than the ignominious streak was the way the individual players played. They played as if they were confused and were afraid. Wawrow and others arguing for more stability isn't a rigid argument to accept grotesque failure. As you observed there is a positive that came out of this disastrous season: young players getting an opportunity to play. But the benefit is not simply playing them for the sake of playing them as it is putting them in situations and playing them with players that they are best matched with. Having an asset is one thing but what is more important is smartly utilizing the asset. That's what Granato does well and that is why I am an advocate in keeping him as a coach.

John Wawrow has been consistent in his opinion that the constant tumult within the organization with staff changes is one of the primary causes for this failed franchise. Instability has been the hallmark of the Pegula regime. Zigzagging instead of going in a straight direction is not the best route to take toward your destination.

The next coach will be expected to work well with a young roster. We already have that. The next coach will be expected to be able to match the players with the upbeat style of play that is more entertaining. We already have that. The next coach will be expected to put players in the best position to succeed. We already have that. The next coach will be be expected to hold players accountable. We already have that. When you have the ingredients at home to make meal you don't have to go outside to the store.

You have weaved together an interesting conspiracy theory. The problem with it is that it is not true, especially as it applies to Botterill. The former GM would be still on the job if he accepted the owners' request to downsize the hockey operation to save money. The owners had a number of conversations with Botts to go along with their austerity program. He made it clear that he would not be on board with their reorganization. So he left. Did he leave on his own accord or was he fired? It doesn't matter how that conclusion is interpreted. It didn't take long for history to show that Botterill was right and the owners were wrong with their attempt to refashion the organization. Now what is being done is to restore what they took apart. When you take one step forward and two back you end up falling behind.

He's not a banger type of player like Risto who grabs your attention with hits. He's a defenseman whose game is predicated on positioning and intelligence. In his short stint he already has shown that he is one of the most efficient players on the unit. The unit is now comprised of players who have different complementary styles that this staff should be able to knit together and form a well rounded unit. I like him a lot as a player.

Your assessment is fair. With Eichel I think the team edge goes to the Sabres. Others can take the opposite view in comparing these two teams and have a valid view. The one positive in floundering in the abyss this year is that it allowed Granato to play so many young players not only on the roster but also prospects who were in Rochester. Bryson and Samuelsson have shown that they are ready to make the jump. That certainly gives the organization a better sense of what they have in the system and to what degree they have to go to the market in order to address some needs. And being comfortable with your own young players that will give the organization more financial wherewithal to address the contracts that are coming up with their own players, most notably Dahlin, Ullmark and Reinhart.

Too many QAnon members. They are speaking in code. ☠️

Since you seem to be knowledgeable about Rochester I would like your opinion on two or three players on their roster who you believe will be able to make the jump to the NHL in not too distant future.

The goalie issue is going to be a major focus for this front office this offseason. It will focus on Ullmark, his durability and his contract. I just don't know????

If you add Jack to the top line in itself has an elevating affect not only for the #1 line but also the #2 line. As you are pointing out there is more than enough raw material to work with to assemble genuine top two lines without the need to shipping out any of our emerging talent to get an outside fix when the answer can be found internally. And if Skinner can be salvaged with better handling then more pieces fall into place. While Jack is a given factor Skinner might be the bigger X and bonus factor.

Most rosters get tweaked every year, even talented rosters often due to contract and cap considerations. So I expect changes but not major alterations. My contention is that internal improvement is going to be a bigger factor for us than for many teams because our young core is larger than what most teams have. Mitts, Cozens, Thompson, Dahlin, Joki, Olofsson (I'm aware he is a little older), Bryson etc. If you look at the Boston roster they may be a more established roster but it's my belief that our roster has more upside than their older roster. Washington is a cup contending team with a very established roster. However, it is fair to say that our younger core makes up a larger component of the roster than their veteran laden roster. The same claim can be made in a Pittsburg comparison. So my point is it would be a wiser not to tamper too much with that core in order to get a more immediate fix. What is evident when watching games under Granato is that when the Sabres get solid/good/consistent goaltending the Sabres can be competitive even against superior teams. That's the critical issue you have been pounding at for a long time. And on that the issue we are simpatico.

As you stated there is a strong argument to shake up a roster that hasn't produced. But that's not how this roster should be looked at. The Krueger method was a roster crushing system. In comparison, the Granato method gives you a better insight to the actual talent level of the roster. Even with a relatively small sample size it is evident that there is much more talent to work with than was apparent when Krueger was behind the bench. And because there is a young core that is playing better under the new coach it augurs well that those players still have more potential to tap. If you add in Jack to the mix and just maybe a much better return on the Skinner investment then the case can be made to be judicious and not aggressive in altering the roster. It just seems to me with better coaching guidance that internal improvement more than outside additions will be the better approach to take this offseason.

If you think that comment was harsh consider this. A couple games ago on the NBC TV broadcast one of the announcers said that the Sabres in this game look like a genuine NHL hockey team. 🤡

When I saw the interview that was my concern. Has he reached the point of no return of wanting a change of scenery after years of watching the playoffs from his couch? It's got to be difficult seeing teammates such as Hall and Montour relieved to be traded from a dysfunctional organization and then seeing them participating in the playoffs. I'm hoping that this team finishes strong and he ends up truly believing that the situation here is not a delusion and it has genuinely changed for the better.

You bring up an interesting issue about Jack and chemistry. Jack is one of the top 10-15 players in the league. He is the best players on the Sabres. But he will still have to reestablish a chemistry with whoever his wingers are and he will have to reestablish his voice with new players and other emerging players. Will there be a different chemistry with Jack back in the room? Probably so. Will there be other voices in the room? Yes. My point about the issue of chemistry that you keenly noted is that it will not be the same as before and that it will be constantly adapting to the changing and maturing room.

Whether it is liked or not it is part of the media business that has contributed to expand the revenue base that has enriched the players. All pro sports have similar arrangements of interaction between the media, players and coaches.

What we both are essentially saying is that Granato sees that one of his primary roles as a coach is to maximize the talents of his players. In contrast to Krueger player development is more of a priority than adherence to a system. DG's hockey philosophy is if the system doesn't match the talents of his roster then alter the system to get a better match. Krueger's approach was if the player didn't fit his pigeonhole system then jettison the player. The owner and organization were late in firing Krueger. If they would have kept him on longer how much more damage could he have done. I blame the extended foolishness on the owner. And as you and many are indicating Olofsson is a classic example of a player who was restricted when he had so much more to give. If you translate that underutilized talent to the roster as a whole you are wasting at least 25% production. That is a sin.

For those calling to trade Olofsson they are basing much of their position on the static and erroneous view that he is mostly a PP sniper. That's not the case or more accurately being lesser the case now. He has steadily widen the scope of his game where he is credibly playing as a first or second line forward. The Granato staff has emphasized that he needs to move in all areas and broaden his game. And that is exactly what he is doing. I like Borgen a lot. But the unit he is on has a greater reservoir of talent than our forward unit has. If I am forced to choose losing a defenseman or a forward I'm definitely keeping the goal scorer on a less than prolific scoring team over the defenseman who is part of a larger talented group.

I wholehearted agree with you that the Sabres have assembled enough talent to compete and in the not too distant future be considered a serious team. As you pointed out the underutilization of players such as Thompson, Cozens and for different reasons Skinner is an example of squandering the talents you already have. Where I have a little different perspective on your take is your "what if" about injuries. Usually, all teams have to contend with losing players due to injuries in a long and grinding season. And because of the Covid issue it is even more of a factor because of the compressed schedule. And what shouldn't be forgotten is that this virus era has put this team in an even more challenging conference. What we are seeing now is that the talent in the system has started to percolate up to the point that the pool of players to draw from is larger than it has been in a long time. Next year, we will be seeing players competing for positions and roles. And that will enhance the pool of NHL ready players to draw from when the inevitable injuries happen. The future looks bright.

It started either last year or the year before. He has basically ignored P. Ham for quite a while.

There are plenty of things to criticize the former coach that don't need to be rehashed. What's obvious is obvious. Even saying that there is one thing that he did that should earn him scorn is the manner (bordering on vindictive) he went out of his way to bury Skinner. Granato has done a lot of things that are contrary to what Krueger promoted but the manner he is now utilizing Skinner is emblematic on his approach of maximizing the talents of players and managing their liabilities. There is a constant refrain that Skinner is a one dimensional player who isn't defensively responsible. In this game he worked as hard checking and defending as he did creating offensive changes. This player who was dispatched to the stands is now a first line player and a contributor. Krueger is a smart and worldly man who showed the world that hockey-wise he was obtuse. My short thoughts on this game: The Sabres had more energy than the Penguins. Tokarski played like a #1 goalie. He was the biggest factor in our win. Samuelsson is freaking big. He was fundamentally sound and played with maturity. I like his game. The Mitts line is playing like it is our #1 line. The players are battling and holding their own on the individual matchups. Bjork is not only fast but he is a worker. The Sabres are playing an entertaining brand of hockey. As a fan I am uplifted and energized.

Even with the early losses when Granato first took there was an immediate change on how the team played. The team played more of a N/S game, the passing was crisper and the team played with less hesitancy. There was more playing and less thinking. It was as if the team had a weight lifted off of its shoulders. As it has been noted before I can't think of one player who isn't playing better under Granato than Krueger. It's a process with no quick fix. There is still a lot to do but a foundation is being built the right way. Krueger prioritized a system at the expense of player development; Granato believes in a system that promotes player development.