JohnC

The sentiment that you are expressing corresponds to my sentiment about him. He has been given time to physically mature and be prepared to play at a NHL level. That forbearance has run its course. It's now time for him to show if he can play in this league or if he is nothing but a insignificant fringe player who periodically can tantalize you with a skilled play. Those are the type of players that you simply can't rely on. Am I a hopeful about his prospects? I just can't say. And not being able to be more decisive about him is in itself an indictment of him. If he can elevate his baseline of play it would be helpful in the rebuilding of the roster with the younger core. Now he needs to show it if he can. I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Tage will never be a player who will attain a high-level of hockey intelligence like Reinhart has. If you don't have it you don't have it. But I'm more optimistic than you are that he can raise his intelligence quotient a little more to the point of adequacy. If hard coaching doesn't work this year then he will fade into oblivion.

You are astutely hitting on the issue that will determine whether he can play in this league. The parts are there to his game but they are not working in unison or on a regular basis. With him there are times that when his episodic play will tantalize you. However, when you tally his overall production per ice time it is doesn't come close to meeting one's expectation. He needs hard coaching and to be held to account. I believe under Granato he will get it. Tage has had more than enough time to grow into his body and be acclimated to the NHL game. It's put up or take a hike time.

If the Anaheim deal materializes with Zegras included in the deal with their first pick I would be ecstatic. Many reports indicate they are holding firm on keeping Zegras.

I would say Dahlin benefited the most with Mitts being the second most beneficiary of the Granato effect. I thought the Asplund/Mitts combo fit well together where each player fed off of each other. Of the veterans I thought that Okposo was revitalized as a player under Granato. The one player who needs to step up his game is Thompson. Granato was not going to allow him to play an unfocused and meandering style of play. When Thompson played too loosely and lost his connection to his linemates the coach intervened and took away his minutes, and even sat him. That got his attention. Coming into camp he needs to show some urgency and recognize that if he doesn't seize the opportunity he has that he will fall by the wayside. It's time to put up or sink into the pool of mediocrity and irrelevance.

He's 18 yrs old with a high level of work ethic. You don't think his assets will get better and his liabilities turned into non-issues as he gets older? In the recent tournament the former NHL coach started him off with limited ice team and then significantly increased his ice time as the tournament progressed. His trajectory is higher than you are assigning to him now.

The more I hear about him from analysts the more confirmed I am with my stance. Of course there is no unanimity as to who should be the first pick. No question there are good arguments for other players but in my mind not only is he the safest pick but also has a lot of upside. My next option would be Beniers. If you look at the decisions that Adams has made in bringing in staff such as Karmonos, Ventura, Granato, putting together the expansion list etc they all fall within the boundary of being fundamentally sound decisions that are not reaches or acting outside of the box. A Power selection would fall in this same safe category.

I do believe they will be drafting Power. No need to discuss because we will soon find out.

Girgensons might have been a player that Seattle would be interested in but his contract is too rich for what he has to offer. Odds are that Miller is a player they would most consider.

I very much doubt that Zemgus would be protected. It's more likely that Risto will be protected with the expectation that he will be soon traded. I'm not putting much stock in judging this front office based on their expansion list. As far as I'm concerned it is an inconsequential issue for this organization. On the other hand the issue I will be closely following is the return on our traded players. That's where judging the FO's performance is my focus of attention.

I have listened to Marty Biron talk about this issue on a more than a few occasions. Each time he has emphasized that there will be plenty of mid-level goalies who will competing with each other on the market. He has also emphasized that although he wants Ullmark back he feels that the Sabres shouldn't over spend for him. I like Ullmark a lot. He has steadily improved in his development. But let's be fair-minded in our evaluation of him. He is at best a mid-tier starting goalie who has concerning durability issues. I'm confident that when the market opens up or through trades the Sabres will have more than enough goalie options to choose from. I'm just not as exercised by this issue as you are. My biggest concern is the return on our traded assets.

I don't understand your intensity on this issue. After the expansion draft the free agent market will be flooded with goalies that we can choose from. And then there is the option of trading for a goalie. With respect to signing Ullmark the issue isn't so much what the organization wants to do as it is what does the player want to do? Does he want to sign here, and if so, at what price? If he doesn't want to be here then you move on to the next best options. I believe that the Sabres are handling this situation as well as it can be expected. If you can't influence the market then you adjust to it. Be patient and don't force things.

Teams with a number of talented players can't give all of them fair-market contracts. The contract pieces simply don't fit within the cap puzzle. Some players are going to get shortchanged. When the numbers don't add up for the affected players and teams, no matter how hard you try, then you have to accept the harsh reality of the $$$ numbers, and one way or another shed the player/s. You can do it by trading, exposing the players in the expansion draft or allowing a player/s to move on to the market and seek better financial options. The teams that will benefit from the system are teams with cap space. The problem for the Sabres is that it is not an appealing destination for players because of its reputation for futility. Hopefully, with good stewardship that maligned reputation will change to a more reputable reputation.

Seattle put up $650 M to buy a NHL franchise. I'm sure they are realistic enough not to expect to have the opportunity to select top tier talent or emerging young talent from the expansion pool. But with the large amount they did put up they should have the opportunity to select enough quality players that would allow them to reasonably compete from the start. I'm not sure how good Borgen is going to be. My sense is that he can be a good third pairing defenseman who adds a level of physicality that this team is short on. But that is not to say if he is selected by Seattle our roster will be dinged much. Compared to many teams the players the Sabres will be exposing are inconsequential players who can easily replaced. And if you factor in Skinner's acceptance of removing his NMC and allowing himself to be exposed it makes it even less likely that a player the Sabres really wanted to keep will be exposed. Ironically, in a certain respect having a less than robust roster works in their favor. For many teams deciding who to expose in the expansion draft calls for many tough decisions. Because of the Sabres' dearth of talent the expansion draft is a relatively simple and inconsequential matter.

With respect to the Rangers their roster is already full of young and upcoming players. On top of that their farm system is deep with a lot of players who are close to being NHL ready. The Rangers are in as good position to trade some of their emerging talent without very much depleting their system. The owner of the Rangers recently fired the coach and GM who were responsible for successfully rebuilding the Rangers. Their often mocked owner wants to win now and not later. If Jack were traded to the Rangers they would get a star who was in the prime of his career with many optimum playing years ahead of him. My point is the Rangers are in a good position to trade for Jack without depleting their talent pool. And again I emphasize without Lafreniere included in a Jack trade there should be no deal.

While he has played in Washington I never heard about his educational pursuit. Good for him. I have even more regard for him as a person.

Attached is a mock draft taken from the NHL.com site. Within the link is a 7 min interview with Sam Contentino talking about the prospects. https://www.nhl.com/news/mock-2021-nhl-draft-luke-hughes-new-jersey-devils-los-angeles-kings/c-325675970?tid=277764372

The baggage he carries relates to his onerous contract and not the player. If he had a contract with much less term Seattle might have an interest in plucking him off the expansion list with the hope that he can regain his scoring prowess. And he knows that as well.

There is a simple ground rule for the Sabres: No Lafreniere-- no deal. From everything that I have read the Rangers are adamant that they will not trade him. And the same line of thinking should apply to Anaheim: No Zegras---no deal. And everything that I have read about the Ducks is they are adamant that Zegras not be included in a deal. My recommendation is to hang up the phone.

I don't agree with you that asking Skinner to waive his NMC is disrespecting him as a player. In a sense it is the opposite. I'm sure that when the GM asked him to waive his clause that he was informed that there was an infinitesimal chance that he would be selected by Seattle. And Skinner who is a smart guy and in consultation with his agent knew that to be true. So he did something that will benefit the team that he will be playing for. Helping the team also indirectly helps him. Skinner knows as well as anyone that for a number of reasons his play has precipitously declined. He is smart enough to know that with the departure of the previous coach and the hiring of Granato he has a better chance of reviving his career. By agreeing to waive his self-interest clause he demonstrated to the organization that he is bought in to the team and this new regime.

When people primarily out of defiance don't want to do the sensible thing when it relates to a life and death issue they aren't acting rationally. Nearly 99% of the hospitalizations and deaths associated with covid are not vaccinated. This is ignorance rising to a deadly level. I don't wish anyone ill-will. What I don't have to give is sympathy for something that can be easily prevented.

The vaccine research that ended with at least three effective vaccines didn't start when covid started ravaging the world. The foundation of these current vaccines was built a number of years ago when the sars virus was ravaging the far east. That's when the research for the current vaccines started. The basis of the current vaccines were being researched years ago. When the sars virus was mostly tamed after wreaking havoc in the far east the research dramatically slowed. My point is that this vaccine wasn't rushed because the ground work was done years ago. And then over the past year or so it started up again at an intense level when this year's covid outbreak worked its way through the world. The simple and stark truth is 98-99% of the people dying in the US from covid were not vaccinated. What is the explanation for so many people not getting vaccinated? Willful ignorance based on an anti-science orientation and a political leaning that promotes an anti-establishment and anti-elite belief system.

The way Granato operates, as do most coaches, if not all, is that he doesn't ask a player if he wants to do something; he tells them what to do. The HC makes decisions on what is best for the team. If the coach wants to split up the lines in order to get more balance I'm sure he he will talk to the player in advance of the move, and then make the move. It doesn't matter if the player is happy with his changing role or not. If a player is unhappy but continues to play hard that is fine. If a player is unhappy and his play slips he will be sat down. Holding players accountable for their play is a responsibility of the coach. Making players happy is not a major concern of his.

Sometimes in a relationship there is no solution if one of the parties doesn't want a solution. When it reaches that point of no return it is best to acknowledge it and then move on and leave the rancor behind. The act of departing doesn't have to be a totally negative experience. It can in the end result in a revival for both parties.

The reasons for the player's disillusionment are not too difficult to discern. When you reside in a rickety house with the roof leaking and the foundations buckling it shouldn't be surprising that you would prefer living in a more stable house. In his fifth year, although sidelined due to injuries last year, the Sabres had the worst record in the NHL. He's simply grew tired of being stuck in such a dispiriting situation. He's not unique with the feelings he has. It's the same sensation that Reinhart, Risto and others have. There is no back story to figure it. It's a story that is in plain sight for everyone to see. As I said in the prior post it just seems as if it got to the point where it is in everyone's best interest to move on and get a fresh start. What I am focused on is the return. When the train has left the station it is gone. The issue then becomes about the next train and not the train that has passed you by.