JohnC

It's obvious this roster needs players who play a tougher brand of game. But that will be insufficient if the rest of the lineup collectively doesn't also add a more disciplined element to their game. Obviously, not every player is built to play a rugged style of game. But that doesn't mean that there can't be a greater emphasis on responsible two-way and consistent energetic play. How many games did you watch where it seemed that this team played like it was fatigued while the opposition played with energy. Especially on back to back games, the teams simply won't have it. That's the reality of a long and grinding season. It just seems that it happened to us more than it did to other teams. We now have a coach that will hold the players accountable. That in itself should make a big difference.

I have somewhat of a different take on Greenway. I agree with you and @dudacek's assessments that Greenway's play lacks a grit component to it. That dog on bone style doesn't describe how he plays. (As both of you accurately describe.) On the other hand, I will say that he plays to his size and plays a strong game. He isn't easily moved in either of the zones and he rarely gets knocked off the puck. In my view, he and Benson are the two players who give us net presence, something that this team is dismal at. There is no question that Greenway lacks the speed and quickness to be able to excel in the tight man on man style of play. Yet, although he lacks the required quickness, he's a moose on the ice that is difficult for the opposition to move. In my view, he was a solid cost/benefit pickup.

If either player demonstrably outplays the players in camp assembled by the GM, then they should make the roster. If Adams doesn't bring in enough talent, then that is another issue. It's not inconceivable, but less likely, that one of these rookies makes the team even with an infusion of outside talent.

Considering the roster assembled entering camp, Benson earned a spot. Whether the GM failed to start off with a more robust roster in camp is another issue. Not only did Benson legitimately earned a spot but he also acquitted himself quite well throughout the season.

We are in accord on the issue of rookies earning a spot/s and the necessity of bringing in talent from the outside. The 3C issue is a big question. Is the GM going to be bold or timid in his approach this offseason? As has been discussed before, if the GM adds a 2/3 C player to the roster, there will be a lot of flexibility in how the lines get assembled.

What happens if Kulich and/or Savoie shine in camp and demonstratively outperform other players competing for a roster spot? Do you send them down because you are wedded to an approach that is usually the right way to go. Or do you make a judgment on an individual case that goes against the norm. I was surprised when Benson made the roster last year. As it turned out, he was an asset and not a liability. In general, the patient approach you are advocating for is the right approach to take. But sometimes, a player playing beyond expectations should be judged on performance. It's a delicate balance that calls for a lot of judgment. In general, I so agree with you that when in doubt take the longer development route. But there are exceptions to every rule.

Most people would agree that Okposo was at the end of his fading career. It just would have been a difficult/harsh thing to do was to cut him (little value on the market) sooner than when they did trade him to Florida for a small return. The GM handled this delicate situation with class and dignity for this loyal and class guy. Okposo was asked if he was willing to be dealt (or it could have been vice versa?) to a team that was a serious cup contender. In general, I thought it was handled properly. The point I'm making is that there was a human element to the Okposo situation.

Assuming he is on this roster and not traded out, it's going to be intriguing to see what roster role he earns. Right now, I would project him more as a fourth C than a 3C. I have liked the energy he plays with but have been disappointed with the output. TBD.

I think with him the issue is more does he want to stay in this environment or does he want a fresh start somewhere else. He's certainly not a central player, but he can be a contributor on the fourth line. He also can contribute as a PK player. We both can agree that whether he stays or not we still need an infusion of new players to better balance the roster and change the chemistry of the roster. For the most part, I would say we are mostly in accord.

If you believe that he would be a good 4th line player for a good team, then why he wouldn't be a good 4th line player for us? His style of play is suitable as a 4th line player. My thought regarding retaining him is what does he want to do, and does I want to move on. If he wants to move on, then I would wish him the best. Another aspect about his game where he is a solid contributor is as a PK. Even if Girgs is kept, the GM will still need to add another player or two to the fourth line.

Nothing you have said about Tuch can be construed as a criticism of his leadership qualities. At least that is my takeaway from your responses on this topic.

Is it known when a Captain is going to be announced? My expectation is that Dahlin is going to be selected as the captain. How many A selections are made? Two or three? If it is three, I expect Tuch, Tage and Cozens will be given the A designation. If it two, I expect Tuch and Tage will be the A letter sown on their jerseys.

I have a different perspective on leadership roles whether it is officially designated as a C or A on the uniform. With players like Okposo, Girgs or Tuch, to a lesser extent, it doesn't matter whether they have that official designation. This type of player leads more by example than by vocally expressing themselves. If I have to predict who is going to be the next captain, it's likely to be Dahlin.

I have no problem with him as a fourth line player at a fourth line price. Don't waste your bountiful reservoir of angst on his re-signing. My sense is that he wants a fresh start somewhere else. Seeing Okposo on a probable cup winning team has to get him thinking about leaving his stale situation.

Your point is well taken but I have a slightly different take. I'm not against bridge contracts. In fact, that is probably the best approach to take with Quinn, JJ and UPL. However, if the organization has a belief that a particular young player is soon to emerge, then strategically, signing that particular potential talent sooner is the smarter way to go. As you well know, cap management is a juggling act that requires a lot of flexibility and judgment. Sometimes, a bad contract decision is made; and sometimes making the right contract decision to extend will allow greater flexibility in the near future. Right now, the Sabres are in a good cap situation that will allow them to add talent. They are not being handcuffed because of their overall contract situation. There is no excuse for them not to bolster and reshape this roster under the current situation.

I agree that there isn't a necessity to sign young players such as JJ and Quinn to extended contracts right away. There's plenty of time to face that long-term deal/issue. Yet, if the organization has a belief that players such as Quinn and JJ will reach the next level, then from a financial standpoint it makes more sense to get that type of deal in place sooner. Players such as Dahlin and Tage are already contractually locked up. From a longer perspective, I think the organization was smart in securing them for the long term. Some people believe that the organization jumped the gun extending a deal to Samuelsson. Although he has been plagued with injuries, my view is that he will prove to be worth his contract. However, there are no guarantees. My basic point is that young players that have demonstrated the expected progression/development, especially those who come from within your system, should be signed sooner to those extended contracts than later. I'm not arguing that all their promising young players should be given those type of long and rich contracts, but wisely selectively the right candidates for that type of gilded contract is the right thing to do.

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/hosts/sabres-live Within this link is a 15 segment where the two hosts talk about the players they would want the Sabres to pursue in the offsesason. Many of the players they are interested in are the same players that many here mention.

I disagree that he wouldn't have made it to the NHL without being associated with Eichel. If that is the case, then why has he been able to earn roster spots on multiple teams? I'm not saying that he is an elite player because he is not close to being that. He is a lower line player who can score at a reasonable level. If someone wants to label him as a pedestrian player, I'm not going to quibble. But it can't be argued that he is not worthy of being an NHL player. If that was the case he would not be able to hang on for so long in this league.

A thoughtful and terrific post. Your next bar tab should be on the house. 👍

No question that Cozens was a disappointment last year. (As you rightly noted.) However, I think you will be making a mistake if you get locked in on that view. I'm hoping that the jolt from a new HC and new linemates will get him back on track and result in him playing like a legitimate 2C.

I definitely lean more toward your position than towards @nfreeman's position on why Guelli came back to Buffalo to run the business side of the operation for both the Bills and Sabres. The Bills have been successfully run on and off the field for the past number of years. On the other hand, the Sabres are known in the NHL and within its own withering fanbase as a dysfunctional and failed franchise. That loser moniker is more than deserved. The greater achievement for him would definitely be to get the moribund Sabres at a level where it becomes a serious franchise again. If that happens, the business side of the Sabre operation will become more financially sound. If he can get the Sabre revenues back up to a league standard level, that will be a greater achievement in the Pegula Sports Operation. Winning is the oil that will lubricate the way for success in his business challenge with the Sabres.

I'm not invested in acquiring any particular player/s. What I want to see is a number of additions that upgrade and better balance the roster. What the discussion on this topic demonstrates is that there are a number of options for the GM to pursue to rework the roster and make it more competitive. We are entering the offseason where this franchise has the roster spots, the cap space and the assets to get this task accomplished. No more excuses.

What 2/3 centers who may be on the market would be a fair return for a Joki and #11 pick? As a fallback position, I like what the price you would consider fair to be for Laughton

What do you find disappointing about this deal? Giving up too much in the exchange?

It becomes obvious that if the GM can acquire a 2/3 C like Erickson (or whoever), there is a cascading effect of increasing the number of potential/intriguing line combinations. Without that quality addition, the impact of the addition is minimized.