JohnC

So what you are basically saying is that this boondoggle was a collaboration. ? As I stated before I understand why he was dealt but it was handled in a manner that set this franchise back.

If the Sabres can use that pick for either an individual or package deal for a second line player then it needs to be dealt. I'm usually a staunch believer in keeping your high picks to build a roster in all of the major sports. However, the Sabres are in a situation where the organization has to exhibit urgency to get better to its battered and moribund fanbase. This offseason the front office needs to make aggressive moves to jolt this franchise upwards. Using that pick to acquire an established young second line player needs to be part of their upgrade strategy.

If pick 8 is likely to become a core player (I agree with your assessment) then that pick has value in a deal to bring back a core player in a trade for immediate help. The Sabre organization has to exhibit urgency this offseason to immediately get better and become a more serious contending team with other teams in its conference who are rebuilding on the fly and getting better at a faster pace. The Flyers and the Rangers are a case in point.

The one transaction that hasn't been adequately explained to my satisfaction is who was pushing the ROR deal? The most intriguing aspect of that damaging deal was who was behind it from the organization side? Was it the GM or the owner/s? For me the issue isn't why was he dealt? It's understandable that a disgruntled player gets moved. At the time it was well known that a bonus payment was coming due and probably influencing the trade timetable. Few people can argue that ROR was one of the best two way players in the league. In hindsight, and even foresight at the time, it would have been better to pay the bonus and then scan the market for a better deal. It can't be questioned that even to this day the void he left at the 2C position still needs to be addressed. A bad decision that has had lingering repercussions.

Money was an issue but the bigger issue was the length of the contract. Trotz wanted a five year extension while the organization believed that the lifespan of a coach for a team was shorter. The organization wasn't willing to budge on the length of the contract issue. So he quit and was immediately signed by the Islanders. What can't be denied is that the Lou Lamoriella and Trotz have done a terrific job for the Islanders.

With respect to the prospects that you listed which players did the former staff mishandle and crimp their potential? Sometimes players are who they reveal themselves to be. In my view non of the players that you listed played below their talent level. And non of the players who were on your list and were traded ended up making a dramatic leap forward after changing organizations.

What I don't understand is why the Taylor staff was fired in the first place? The younger players got the requisite playing time that facilitated their development. And they were playing with selected veteran players who knew that one of their primary roles was to develop the younger players on the roster. At the AHL level there is a delicate balance between developing players and competing. These tasks are not mutually exclusive as they are inextricably linked. Without question the Taylor coaching staff was adept at maintaining that delicate and critical balance. I don't believe that the complete change in the AHL will make a significant difference. And I don't believe that it was necessary. Firing in toto a highly functioning staff of the previous administration and replacing them with people you are acquainted with is a classic definition of cronyism. And that makes me wary.

Lehner used to get frustrated after losses. At first in post game interviews he would discretely criticize the play in front of him and then more explicitly. He was right! The players in front of him were not playing with discipline/intelligence or fulfilling their responsibilities. To be blunt Risto was a dumb player who would constantly be sucked into chasing the puck behind the net and leaving the front of the net uncovered. The reality is that the team wasn't talented enough and the blue line unit was inadequate. I was a persistent and harsh critic of Murray giving up a first round pick for him because I thought that it was a too high a cost for a player whose team wanted to move him because it had plenty of depth at that position. With hindsight I have a tad softened my position recognizing that his current level of play would have made a difference in making the playoffs this season. (My opinion.) Unless there is an addition at the goaltending position (And I don't think there will be.) the player who will make the biggest difference between success and continued mediocrity will be Ullmark. (Again, my opinion.)

The Robin Lehner scenario in Buffalo was a sad and complicated human situation. The Sabre organization was very supportive and did the right thing in getting him help to address his mental health problems. Even after he was not associated with the team the former GM kept in touch. Not trying to be dramatic but it isn't an exaggeration to believe that the organization may have saved his life by helping him get the medical attention that he needed. From a hockey standpoint the Lehner saga demonstrates how much this organization is snake bitten. If we would have gotten the level of goaltending that Lehner played at with the Islanders, Blackhawks and Golden Knights this season the Sabres probably would be participating in the playoffs this year.

Near the end of the abbreviated regular season the Sabres were on the fringe fighting for a playoff spot. During that crucial period of time they had a critical four game western trip. They earned zero points. Please, no more excuses or "what if" imaginary scenarios. They earned exactly what they got i.e. left out.

How would you compare Cozens's style of play and talent level with Chicago's Jonathan Toews? Both have size and a driving type of game. I have said it before much to Thorny's chagrin but I do believe that Cozens had the maturity and physical makeup to play 2C in his rookie year. That doesn't mean that should do it on a full time basis but if done on a periodic basis I believe he wouldn't be overwhelmed.

Most people agree that Mitts was rushed to the big club when he wasn't ready. However, he was belatedly sent to Rochester where he struggled in the beginning and then seemed to become more comfortable as a player and understand his role. Where I disagree with you is that although he was clearly rushed and not handled smartly from a development standpoint I don't accept that he is so damaged that he will never attain what his talents should/could have taken him as a player. The Casey story is not over with. He still has time to demonstrate or not demonstrate that he can be a functioning NHL player. Right now the onus is on him and no one else to prepare as best he can to be ready to handle the rigors of this demanding league.

After reading your explanation I would definitely give up a first round pick to Tampa for him. But most likely Tampa would want more as a prior link suggests.

I'm confused on the RFA contract issue. If Cirelli gets traded to a team that he is not enamored with does he have to sign a contract or just go year to year until he qualifies as an UFA if that is his desire? Whatever the contract ramifications are I still believe that Tampa will work out a deal to retain him. (My opinion.) And if he is dealt the asking price for him is probably going to be more than a pick. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2901013-nhl-rumors-latest-buzz-on-taylor-hall-contract-anthony-cirelli-more

Before a trade I would want to talk to him and his agent about his wanting to come to Buffalo and what would be the parameters of a potential deal. If it is apparent that he isn't enamored with signing with Buffalo I would not agree to a deal. If I knew that he was amenable to a deal I would certainly trade our first pick for him.

I'm not giving up valuable assets for a player that I'm not sure I will have for the long-term. I don't want to deplete precious resources on anyone that I hope will stay longer. It's as simple as that. Next option please.

Unless I can get a long term deal secured with Cirelli I wouldn't deal for him. If I could I would be ecstatic.

Yes. If I can get that winger who will be a component in building a genuine second line I would do so. Not only do you reconstruct the second line with that addition but you push down players to play on an upgraded third line. One of the major deficiencies on this team is a lack of secondary scoring to balance out the first line. I have always been a person who valued high draft picks to build a franchise in all the major sports. However, because of the recent history of systemic failure this franchise needs an immediate jolt to alter this negative dynamic. Also, the exasperated and fading fanbase deserve it now, not later. And make no mistake about it the Jack exasperation meter is real. The get me out of here declaration is a looming threat. And I don't blame him! If this new regime doesn't have a sense of urgency after all that has gone on before their installation then they are out of touch before they even started.

If you could get a genuine second line talent who is in his mid-twenties with that pick you got to deal it. The future is now. The audience is suffocating and becoming moribund. It desperately needs oxygen right away. Another year out of the playoffs and we are going to have a Jack problem. And I wouldn't blame him.

Who the heck is Rakish? Is he an Indian guru that you follow when you are in a deep state of meditation? ?

You and few others here are exceptional in the analysis of draft prospects. It's a treat reading your views on this draft class. I salute you and the others in your knowledge of the prospects. ? It seems that right now Lafreniere and Byfield are ranked in the top two with Stutzle and Perfetti also considered in the upper echelon by some. If you were asked what couple of players in the second half of the top ten (5-10) could turn out to be very good players who would they be?

I have never said that Adams was hired primarily because he was cheap and easy. You have misconstrued my commentary on this subject.

I don't think you are referring to my comments because I have not said he will be a disaster as the head of the hockey operation. But what I have clearly stated is that the heavy financial structure of the operation was a major reason why there was a GM change. And I have also stated that if the former GM would have been agreeable to the changes mandated by the owners he would have been retained. (Many people disagree with that view.)

I said it before and I will say it again I'm holding my judgment until I see what the hockey decisions are in this critical offseason. Other than that I don't know what else to say.

The games are going to have a lot less than 10,000 people, if any people, at the games because the covid issue will still be a significant factor hovering over the sport, country and world. Although I do have qualms I'm not going to work myself into a frenzy about the structure of the organization and who is running the operation. What I will be watching are the decisions being made in this offseason. Then I will make my judgment.