JohnC

The Sabres drafted Eichel. Was that a mistake? The Sabres drafted Dahlin instead of a forward? Was that a mistake? Reinhart was the second pick in his draft. It was a reasonable pick. As you noted Cozens look good. And as you noted Mitts was rushed. However, that is not to say that he won't develop. Nylander, just like Mitts, was drafted in the vicinity of where he was ranked in his class. He ended up being dealt for Joki. So essentially his selection has turned out to be Joki who is capable of being a second-pairing caliber of player. Olofsson was developed in the system and has turned out better than one could reasonably expect. This organization traded for ROR and they got one of the best two way centers in the game. And that is what he was and is. But for a number of reasons that have exhaustively been discussed here he was moved. There isn't anyone who will make the claim that we didn't get shortchanged. We are not the only team in hockey that has moved disgruntled players because it wanted to dispose of a problem. I would have waited for a better deal but the organization made the decision that it didn't want him in the locker room. Will Tage turn out to be a decent player? I don't know. Young tall and lanky players take time to physically mature. Chara's early years were not impressive. KI'm not suggesting he is the caliber of player that Chara is but from a physical profile these tall and thin players take time to physically mature and fill out. It's easy to be an oracle and say who should have been drafted 3 to 4 yrs after the fact. When you draft 17-18 yr olds you never really now how the player will turn out unless the player is one of the few who fall in the can't miss category. But if you go back and review the players who were drafted they all fell in the range where they were ranked. How else are you going to do it?

What do I and the Donald have in common? I also wanted to buy the Bills when they were for sale. However, just like Donald I lacked the coinage. The difference between our efforts to buy is that I didn't have the PR apparatus to promote the delusion. Promoting a myth doesn't make it real.

Scandella was a superb mentor and complement to the young defenseman. Joki was 20 yrs old last year. His poise for his age and inexperience was impressive. I see a lot of upside with him. Internal improvement by our young players is going to be an important factor in making this team credible. You make a keen observation. I watched some of the old games on MSG during this hockey interlude. I didn't realize how good Tallinder was. Because he was so efficient and not a banger he was not a high profile player. But without a doubt this quiet player was an instrumental player.

Botterill has received some deserved criticism for his rebuild strategy of being too patient with his draft and develop approach. I'm sure I'm in the minority here but I believe it was to an extent working but the time required to take that route was a factor in his demise. He needed to be more bold and exhibit greater urgency to accelerate the rebuild process especially with Jack in his prime. There is not question that the ROR trade had lingering damaging consequences. But let's give credit where deserved. I thought the Jokiharju deal for Nylander was a terrific deal and the acquisition of Kahun for players who weren't going to be here the next year was also excellent deal. I thought Joki was our most consistent defenseman last year. I think he is going to be a gem.

Dudacek's standard extended responses are still considered succinct compared to Marty's meandering and exhausting responses. Marty is one of a kind. He can not be duplicated. Dudacek is a fine fellow but he is no Marty

Dudacek can't be Marty because the congenial and loquacious Marty gives longer open-ended responses that include frequent references about his sizeable twitter followers.

You make a good point. On the other hand my sense is that Skinner doesn't fit the mold of the player he prefers. The only time I have ever heard Krueger exhibit irritation in an interview was when he was asked about Skinner's diminished role on WGR. His response and tone was sharp and less than discreetly indicated that he was not satisfied with how he played. I may be reading too much into his tone and response. With respect to Johansson I thought playing him with Kahun and Olofsson at the end of the season was an interesting combination. They seemed to have a rapport and their styles of play seemed to mesh.

If Kahun becomes more of a good third line player than a genuine second line player the deal for him is still a plus deal for us. Getting more lower line production is a critical need for this team. You make an excellent point that this organization has for too long counted on "if" players. Not much has materialized from this category of players. However, when the "if" players are young players then over time some of those "if" players can turn into "can do" players. This organization needs some luck from its current batch of "if" players such as Tage-Mitts-Cozens-Kahun. We need some good fortune for the potential to be realized into production. Is it too much to expect or too soon to expect? Maybe, maybe not?

No to the first question. No to the second question. And no to the third question.

In general we are in accord. With respect to the highlighted section if you want an increased chance for Skinner to return to his prolific scoring form then the best situation for him is to be on the Jack line. I still believe that our first line should be made up of Skinner-Jack-Reinhart. While many want that line to split up for more dispersed scoring from another line my bias is to keep that prolific line in tact. When considering why Skinner was less effective last year compared to his first year a significant factor was the change in coaching and the system he installed. Krueger system relies on two way players. Skinner doesn't fit that model, and I don't believe he ever will. Krueger wants his line players to play a tight and responsible two way game. Skinner certainly can give a more earnest effort on the defensive side of the game but that's not where his value lies. He's a goal scoring sniper on a team that lacks potency. We should allow him to play to his strengths and be more tolerable of his deficiencies.

Your comments are the exact duplication of what Marty Biron stated when he was asked about Strome.

The bigger issue with these three players isn't so much with them playing together as it is whether individually they are good enough to contribute spread out among the lines. If two out of the three or four players (including Tage) demonstrate that they are worthy of their NHL roles, whatever it is, then that in itself will provide a team boost and allow for more cap flexibility to bring in a couple of good players. Last year I didn't expect Olofsson to be such a scoring factor. He made a leap from the previous year. Can Kahun or Joki do the same? Or maybe Mitts? Much is riding on the internal improvement of the young players already on the roster. As it stands I believe the most important young player that this team is counting on to elevate his game is Ullmark. With consistent goaltending this team is much more competitive.

Good observation. Your thoughts on Strome are the same as Marty Biron's thoughts. He felt that he was somewhat like Reinhart who is a heady player but was too slow for a 2C. He preferred a player who was faster and played a harder game.

What are the thoughts of trading our #1 pick for Chicago's Dylan Strome---straight up deal? This topic has been discussed on more than a few occasions on WGR's Instigator Show with Marty Biron saying no while the other hosts would be more receptive to making that deal. Craig Rivet has been vocal in his willingness to trade our first round pick or including him in a deal for immediate help at the 2C spot.

Being a legend in one's own mind is like being drunk on one's own delusion. Others might look askance at one's staggering inebriation but so what as long as you are happy with one self. ?

What do you have against incoherence? It gives you more opportunities to be right or make the claim that the other person misinterpreted your vagueness.

There is an adage: When in doubt make it up. ?

When one's reputation has been sullied it can never be fully restored. ?

Who ever you think I am you are mistaken. I have no previous history with this site. Trust Shrader.

Maybe Girgs was rushed like Mitts and Tage. But even if Zemgus was given more time at the lower levels to develop odds are (my opinion) that the player he is today is the player he would be with the extra development period. Zemgus is a third or fourth line hard working gritty player without much finishing ability. The line and role he has on the line with Larsson and Okposo is a role that matches his talents. In my opinion the player who was hurt the most by rushing the development process was Mittelstadt. I'm hoping that the unwise way he was handled doesn't permanently damage his entry into the NHL. We should get a better reading of that in the next training camp.

You need to be open-minded. The more I post the more I will be disliked. It happens all the time. ?

The DJT stories originated with DJT. It was a PR ploy. He had no cash on hand and had no ability to raise money. The NFL wants/requires new owners to mostly purchase their acquired franchise with cash. That's exactly how the Pegulas bought the Bills. Trump through the courts is ferociously fighting to keep his books closed to the public. He never would have allowed the NFL to scrutinize his shady books, a requirement before authorizing it to be sold. His interest in buying the Bills was a myth originated by himself. From a financial standpoint just like in the Wizard of Oz there was nothing real ($$$$) behind the curtain of deception.

On the advice of my attorney I will not to admit to anything incriminating. I refuse to be unmasked. ? ?

I respect your well thought views on Skinner but respectfully and strenuously disagree with it. Without question Skinner is not a two way player and is not an adept passer. That's not the player he is or ever was. He is however one of the best snipers in the league. It's that elite characteristic that makes him valuable. What you are doing is defining him through the prism of his weaknesses instead of doing so from his strengths. Elite shooting and goal scoring ability are prized attributes in this league. Added to the fact that when you have a sniper on a team noted for its scoring impotency then he should be valued even more. The Sabres' roster is made up of a lot of perimeter players. Other than Reinhart what other players hover around the net where the brutal physical action happens and where most of the goals are scored in the league? Skinner is one of the few players who scores with his quick draw shot most of his goals within a perimeter 12'. That instinctive ability to find the hole in that congestion around the net is a talent that is nearly non-existent on this team. My recommendation is focus more on what a player can do and don't be blinded to his unique assets because of what he doesn't do well.

The imperative for this offseason is that there has to be offensive additions to create a decent second line. When there is a shortage of second line caliber of players no matter how you juggle the first two lines it is insufficient. Skinner playing with Jack maximizes his best attribute of being a sniper. Skinner playing on a second line without Jack not only makes him a lesser player on that line but it also diminishes the Jack line without him. As I stated in a prior post my preference is to have a first line made up of Skinner-Jack-Reinhart. As a first line it would rank as one of the better lines in the league. We are not disagreeing.