JohnC

Even with the consultation from the added staff what will tilt the selection of Granato is how this team finishes this turbulent season. If the overall play is dramatically better since his elevation this season and the younger players continue to get better then why wouldn't you retain him?

I agree with your comment. Good goaltending and scoring certainly go hand and hand in winning. In this game I thought that Jersey territorially had the edge and that Ullmark had more tougher shots to stop. He made them. In my mind that was the difference

When you have good goaltending you are usually in the game even if territorially the other team has the margin. Dahlin has been unshackled. He and Joki complement each other. Joki plays the tighter defensive game allowing Dahlin to do more creative freelancing on offense. Mitts has taken a lot of heat from the crowd. Understandably so. Each game he seems to get better and more confident. Under Granato the team is getting better and playing a faster north/south game. And what is most encouraging is that the younger players are getting better. My money is on Granato being the HC next season.

You are getting carried away with your summarily dismissal of the current coach. I don't know for sure if he would be the best option at coaching this team. That's why I'm willing to wait and see how this incomplete team performs under him. If it consistently elevates its play (as it is doing now) then he should be seriously considered as a coaching candidate. If he doesn't then you have your answer. Being impatient and jumping to a conclusion is not the right approach to take for an organization that has a wretched history of making bad decisions.

There are still plenty of games left in this meaningless season. I'm willing to see how this season plays before prematurely making a decision to exclude anyone. I agree with you that this fan base has been abused with the innumerable blunders that this organization has made. The advantage that this front office has is that it can see how this current interim coach performs with this current cast of players. You may be willing to summarily dismiss him but I don't.

Without question there still should be a coaching search. But if for the rest of the season this team plays exponentially better than under the former coach then why shouldn't Granato get credit for this team's transformation? In short order he has taken over a roster that has played as if it is shackled and now has them playing as if they have been liberated. That metamorphosis certainly should be attributed to the coaching change. Mitts, Thompson, Joki, Dahlin, Okposo and Montour certainly are playing better under the Granato approach compared to the recently dispatched over-thinking coach. From what I have observed since the coaching change Montour (followed by Dahlin) more than any other player has benefited from the coaching change. Both his offense and defensive games have been elevated. It's a shame that he came to this team only to have his impressive skating talents stifled instead of smartly utilized. And because of his misuse this UFA will probably will be dealt. This organization has gone through constant turmoil and staffing change since the Pegulas took over. If this current coach continues to demonstrate that he can maximize the talents of the players he has during his coaching audition then why wouldn't you want to keep him?

I'm going to stop posting for a few weeks to cool off. Your deleting of my post and private criticism and penalizing for my comments on the vaccine and the Covid situation is perplexing. Nothing that I said was political. Everything I said was an accurate description of the situation. If you can't handle a view that you disagree with or upsets you then that is your issue, and not mine. The purpose of a board is to exchange views, sometimes in a robust fashion but also in a respectful way. That's what I have always strived to do.

We are not that far away from having enough product to meet demand. The first priority in the tiered system is directed toward the population that is most vulnerable and exposed to the virus. I just heard on the radio today that the military is going to be dispatched to help with the logistics and with the administration of the project. But even when we get to the point where enough product is available there still has to be an orderly system in place to administer the vaccine. You can't have 2000 people show up at a school gymnasium when the capacity to vaccinate is only 500 per day. That is belatedly being addressed now. The shame of this situation is that the logistical spade work should have been done way in advance so when the vaccine was available there would have been a more organized and larger platform to administer the vaccine. The prior administration was reluctant to federalize this massive project so they left it up to the states to fend for themselves and ruinously compete against one another. That was never going to work; that was hideously stupid. (Not a political statement but a factual statement.) I'm not worried about the professional sports industry. When we get to the point where the vaccine is more readily available (maybe two months) the industry will make the arrangements to get their athletes and those involved in the business taken care of.

Vaccines are fine when their position in the line is ready to receive it. A third company, Johnson and Johnson, is close to getting their single shot vaccine approved. So in another month or two the availability should be substantially better. I have no doubt that when that time comes the league will do what is necessary to acquire enough stock to meet their needs. They just need to wait their turn. I understand your argument that relatively speaking that the amount of vaccine required is miniscule compared to the supply. The problem with that argument is that a number of other factions can use that same argument to jump the line ahead of you. Again, just wait your turn.

Every thing in your post makes sense. Where I have a different take is the significance of the culture issue. The bigger issue for me is the accumulation (or lack of accumulation) of talent. There simply isn't enough talent. This topic has listed a number of "what if" selections and decisions that could have been made and weren't made. So there is no need to cover the same territory. The defining problem with the Sabres isn't that the room has enough character guys so much as it doesn't have enough talent and properly fitting pieces in the room. You can add all the Simmonds and Okposos you want to the room but isn't going to elevate the talent. How many changes to the front office and coaching staff have the Sabres had since the Pegulas took over? And with every change there is a change in the philosophy on how to build a winning franchise. That is a predictable recipe for not simply failure but systematic failure. An unstable organization can't compete with stable organizations that are smartly run. I don't believe as many do that the Sabres right now are in a shambles. What I am saying is that this lurching back and forth hasn't moved us forward but rather set us back and grossly extended what was supposed to be a rebuilding strategy. The Pegulas are not bad owners so much as they are misguided owners. I think especially after their Bills football experience they have learned to hire the right people and allow them to do their job. They need to follow the same formula with the hockey franchise. I'm not as much of an alarmist as many are here. I believe that this team has the talent to be a fringe playoff team and stay in the running until the end of this very abnormal season. What can't be done again is get discouraged and then act out of frustration and set yourself back even more.

I don't think it is the questionable information that is influencing the negative attitude toward the Sabres. I think what is contaminating the perspective of the fans is the extended disappointing and fatiguing history of the franchise. There is a lot of cynicism contaminating the discourse. For many the benefit of the doubt will no longer be extended. That is not a surprise; that is understandable. I am starting to feel the same sensation that @dudacek is feeling. I'm getting tapped out.

You are right that we are the exact opposite. Look at the amount of the front office and coaching turnover that has occurred since the Pegulas took over. And within that staffing turnover how much self-destructive intrigue has gone on? The LaFontaine saga to this day has not been fully explained. When an owner and franchise have to include a non-disclosure clause with the buy out of the dispatched staffer that is an open admission that the disclosure would be embarrassing to the organization and the parties involved. Compare our tumultuous foolishness to the stability of the Bruin organization? The Vegas Knights were an expansion team. Almost right from the start this was a highly competitive team that rather quickly was in a Cup championship series. And since their inception they have been one of the better and tougher teams in the league. While the Sabres are in a generational rebuild mode the Golden Knights have started off as a serious team and in their short history remain a serious team. We are not close to getting there yet. The Sabres are a franchise that doesn't need any more instability. It needs to have a direction and stick with it.

Boston is not always the best team. But on a consistent basis they are one of the better run organizations. And they are run on a fiscally sound manner in which it is judicious on how they pay their players. They are not cheap but what they don't do is give out ruinous long term contracts that limit their future options. As you point out when you have an established team you are in a better position to insert young players and keep the team functioning at the same high level without the drop-off. Boston has an ethos that stresses their own identity. As you noted we are not there yet. It's going to take more time.

I understand your frustration but it is impossible to come up with not only a perfect system to administer the vaccine but also have perfect execution regardless what priority list was agreed to. A new administration took over a non-existent or more accurately chaotic program and is trying to put together a rational plan with in the early stage a limited supply of vaccines. (Not being political but describing the situation.) Currently, there is a priority list that starts with the health care employees and includes people in elderly care facilities. They definitely should be at the top of the list because they are in one case most exposed and in the other case the most vulnerable. Jumping professional athletes ahead of the top tier groups that includes teachers, food services etc. is not fair. The good news is that the vaccine sources are increasing and the logistical organization to handle the expanding vaccine population is being installed. In a month or two the ramping up of the administering infrastructure should be in place, and they should have enough product to steadily administer. My point is that in a month, or more likely two, professional athletes will have access to the vaccines. They should wait their turn. It's not too far off. And it is not difficult to understand your frustration.

The amount of availability and variety of sources of the vaccine is dramatically increasing. In another month, or more likely two, the issue of who has a right to get it first will not be such an intense issue. As you and others point out the total amount of vaccine directed to this professional athletic population is a small slice of the overall vaccine pie. Once the logistics of vaccinating people on a widescale is in place then the issue of who should be prioritized becomes less of an issue because we will be at the general population stage. We are not far from that ramping up stage. So the right thing to do is to just wait a little longer when the priority ranking won't be an issue.

Okposo is not tradeable for a variety of reasons. Without even factoring in his contract his level of play is a shadow of what it once was, and it continues to decline. He's a high character guy who gives it his all. There is little left in his tank to draw from. It is obvious that he is a battered player who is not going to regenerate. No matter how much you root for this high character person there is little appeal on the market for him.

You have a greater tolerance for vino than I do. A bottle of wine would render me incoherent and incapacitated. As I said in a prior post when following a team becomes an aggravating experience it's time to take a break. I, like everyone else, do get frustrated. I haven't reached the no mas threshold yet. But I can certainly understand others getting there.

I think you are underestimating the Capitals. They have a well rounded team and depth to handle the loss of players. Although there were players who missed (I believe) 4 games this team didn't miss a beat. They also used a backup young goalie who played up to a level of a #1 goalie. The coaching change has seemed to invigorate a team that was stale. He didn't bring in a complicated system where the players would have to adjust to. He simplified things and told the players to play hard and don't overthink the game. I'm not predicting that the Capitals will win the cup. But I'm comfortable to say they will be cup contenders. So far this team is on track.

And as was previously mentioned he was sat down. As I stated in previous posts I'm not overly bothered by the ineptitude of the #7 defenseman. The solution is simple: bench the player and find another option such as Borgen. This marginal player isn't a major source of this team's struggles.

I may be getting mixed up here. Did Irwin play yesterday? I don't recall that he did?

The situation is not a disaster. But it's not good enough. Whether a team such as Jersey is better than us is not the issue. What you saw yesterday's game is a team that out hustled us, was quicker and played with a verve that we don't consistently play with. Jersey's backup goalie was demonstrably better than ours. Washington's backup goalie played like a #1 goalie when we played them. From a broader view I agree with @tom websterthat this team is better than what we had. But that shouldn't be the issue. Are we as good as we need to be in order to be a playoff team? I'm not sure?

The big fear that looms over this fanbase is that the history of this franchise is that it doesn't rise as the season advances, it falters and fizzles out. You can have excellent analytics/stats but the numbers can be rendered meaningless when the level of goaltending undercuts the numbers. In a compressed schedule you need to have above average goaltenders to contend. I'm satisfied with Ullmark as our #1 goalie but have become even more worried about Hutton as our #2. And it should be noted that I am one of the lesser of critics of him.

Was that a red or white vino? Did you drink the bottle by yourself or did you share it with someone? If you drank it by yourself I would kindly recommend that you limit your intake. 🍺 I agree with you that this team (franchise) can be frustrating. When it builds up I step back and then cautiously return after the exasperation has been depleted and the tank has been refilled with more positive energy. Just don't get too carried away with the ups and don't get too carried away with the downs.

As @dudacek pointed out he was benched during the game. So the trivial solution of benching (your words) was activated. Irwin is a #7 defenseman with other options available such as Borgen. I didn't say that Matt Irwin isn't a problem. What I did say is that our #7 defenseman isn't one of our bigger problems.

The attention to Irwin is misplaced. If he is ineffective then the solution is simple: Don't play him. Bring up Borgen or whoever. There are bigger issues that need to be addressed before being sidetracked over a marginal player. Our top scoring guns such as Eichel, Hall and Skinner are not scoring goals. Eichel and Hall are accumulating points from assists but these high cost players are performing under their salary status. A bigger problem than the ineffective play of a low cost marginal defensemen is that our net presence in the offensive zone is negligible. When there is a modicum of net presence good things happen. I'm not saying that Irwin doesn't deserve criticism because he does. But he is a problem that merits less concern compared to the big guns constantly misfiring.