JohnC

We had a guy at work who regularly came up with bereavement excuses to get off work. His family must have been miraculously sanctified because both his father and mother died twice. He was so notorious for his absurd lying to get off work that it became a joke. Sometimes these work derelicts forget that they are supposed to come to work for the purposes of working instead of evading.

I am a harsh critic of KA. However, getting Zucker and Greenway have both been quality deals. If he can add two-three similar types of players, this roster would be so much better constructed and in general better.

What do you have against broken tables? What do you call someone who is willing to break his back diving on a table to get a yuk from a drunken crowd? Fat and stupid!

Will you please stop with the Power harangue! He's not going anywhere, and you very well know that. I recommend that you target your venom toward the many other valid targets on the team and staff. With respect to Cozens, I would move him to wing and try to come up with another player to center for him.

The owner has screwed up this franchise. The KA hire was an absurdity beyond anyone's imagination. The irony is that by hiring an unfit GM who would bend a knee to his desires, he ended up losing even more money because he created a product that a growing population of consumers would not tolerate paying for. Our billionaire saved a penny only to lose a dollar $$$. Simply stupid. It doesn't matter whether the Reinhart situation was related to Samuelsson's contract situation. In isolation, not signing Reinhart to a long-term deal when they had the opportunity to do so was a gross miscalculation that was on a malfeasance level.

Whether Samuelsson is on the team or not we still need that muscular defensive/defenseman. I'm not saying I'm high on him but I'm not also saying that I'm done with him. If the turns out to be a solid third pair player, then I find that acceptable.

I understand your well reasoned positon but I'm not aligned with your thinking. My worry is that this inept organization, out of frustration, tears down too much instead of bringing in support players to better balance out this roster. This tear down to build up mentality has to stop. It has kept us stuck in the muck of mediocrity.

The issue isn't whether there is interest in him or not. The issue for the Sabres is what is his value on the market. It seems to me that because of his injury history and inconsistent play that right now the return wouldn't be much. As I stated in prior posts, I would rather keep him and hope that he can play more consistently. I'm with @mjd1001 on his assessment that he is a third pairing caliber defenseman who also is a capable PKer.

There is no question that this is an incomplete roster where the coach has to contend with a roster overloaded with developing and not fully mature players. That's why I have been a constant critic of the GM. I strongly believe that with a few more veteran players to undergird our young roster, this team would be so much better equipped to handle the last periods when play tightens up. Would another Greenway and Zucker type players make a difference? I believe so. My belief is that our GM misread his own roster. He over-rated what he had on hand and assumed some of his young players would make the next developmental leap. Some did and some did not.

Granato was the right coach to follow Krueger. It's still an open question for me whether Ruff is the right replacement for Granato. In my view, Granato's strength is in developing young players. But that stage of development for young players on this team is over with where now it is about seriously competing to win right now. The Granato firing was a reasonable action to take at the time.

I'm a Zucker advocate. He's been our GM's best value pickups during his tenure. We need more Zucker's added to this roster. As far as the Mitts issue, I brought it up regarding how his trade would be assessed if Byram decides to pursue free agency. And regarding to Mitts. although it took some time for him to develop, lest not forget that at the end of his tenure here he became one of our best wall players.

I'm not as harsh in my assessment of Samuelsson as many others are. If he can stay healthy and become a good third pairing player, then he has utility. He also has value when needed he can move up to the higher pairing as the complementary player when called upon. And as you point out, he is a good on the PK. A big part of the frustration about him is his fragility. Can he become more durable? I'm not sure??? Candidly, I expected more from him this season, as I did with Cozens and Quinn.

I would take him back but what would the exchange entail? If we did get him back I would make him our 2 or 3C and put Cozens on the wing where I think he is more suited. I am getting to like Byram more and more. But what happens if, as the cap goes up, he decides to play out his contract and seek a better situation for himself? Then the Mitts trade would turn out to be another boondoggle for our GM.

The laying back in the third period really bothered me last night. The strategy and mindset seemed to be let's just hang on and gut it out. It worked last night but it is a fraught strategy to take too often. I attribute this passive strategy to not having enough veterans to be on the ice to deal with the end of game pressure.

The owner hired an unqualified GM with the intention that he would save him money by keeping the costs down. So what does his inexplicable hire do? He gives out bad contracts. The problematic issue regarding the Samuelsson contract is its length. I agree with you that Samuelsson is turning out to be a third pair defenseman. And what is evident is that the GM's miscalculation with this contract rebounds to hurt him because it's an outsized contract that makes his trade market value less appealing. Right now, I would prefer to keep him and hope that he will become a good third pairing player. What's making that less likely is the durability issue.

Vanguard's S&P 500 index fund is also a good choice.

Quick thoughts on the game: Tuch is my first star and Reimer is my second star. He's really a composed goalie who is positionally sound. This game didn't have much flow to it because there was tight play by both teams. There was a lot of play along the boards. Byram played well. Without Tage there wasn't much offense for us. Because Tage is such a threat he creates a lot of space for others. The play of the game was Johnson for Columbus who scored on a spin a-rama shot. As others stated, the Sabres went into a defensive shell in the third period. I didn't like that. Rosen was okay. He's not a first line player just yet. We won four games in a row and held a lead. I'm not complaining about that. A win is a win. Others might complain but not I. Credit to Columbus who played with a depleted lineup yet played hard throughout. Let's keep raising the bar with winning the next game and getting it to five games in a row. I hope Tage is back by then.

When a person makes the same mistake in three consecutive years, that person is a certifiable dope. This superficial thinking GM believes that the key to success is accumulating talent. What he doesn't understand is that collecting talent and properly constructing a team are qualitatively different. This roster needs to be balanced out with veteran additions. If he would have added another Zucker or two to the forward group and another veteran blueliner, this roster would have been not only better but would have been able to avoid a season sabotaging 13 game swoon. Last offseason, the additions I stated here were doable. It wasn't so much an issue of making a blockbuster deal that is likely to gut your roster as it would have been making enough solid mid-level deals that make your team better. The same cycle of similar mistakes continue to get made by this sycophantic GM. And the same results happen. When will he learn?

There are many reasons why this franchise has failed. The common denominator is the owner. He makes the key hires to run the operation. The organization is structured the way it is because that is the way he wanted it structured. As far as meddling or not, as an owner, that is his prerogative. As far as being an absentee owner or not, again that is his prerogative. As far as the failings of KA you refer to, my question is why was this ill-equipped person hired in the first place? He was a hire that no other owner in the league would have allowed to be interviewed for the job, let alone hired for the job. Who made the hire? Mr. Pegula. For me, it starts at the top. And if KA is such a failure then why hasn't the owner fired him after five undistinguished years? He's never been reluctant to fire upper staff. The main problem that has plagued this flailing franchise is the owner. He's the constant. That's how I see it.

Our owner has chosen to be intimately/actively involved in the franchise. That's his prerogative as an owner. The problem is that he either lacks the self-awareness about his competency about his hockey judgment or he simply doesn't care. He wants to tinker and play with his toy. The outcome is the long-term lackluster record. It can't be ignored.

It's not weird because with respect to that specific incident I don't believe that it is a factor on our franchise's demise. I mostly attribute the franchise's failures and irrelevancy to the period of Pegula's ownership and how he has conducted himself during this sad interlude. If you are searching for a cause/effect look to Terry P. and his foolishness.

The Lucic hit om Miller occurred in 2011. That was 14 freaking years ago! Extrapolating our descent from that hit is not only odd, but weirdly nonsensical. The Sabres have been a mediocre and irrelevant franchise for nearly a generation, not because of a particular hit, but because of an incompetent owner who has hired a less than mediocre staff to run the hockey operations. The Sabres won a game against a superior opponent yesterday. I'm happy about the victory while many are dissatisfied with it. Now we have arrived at a point where after a victory there has been a perplexing freak out. This makes no sense to me. The frustration over this franchise has spilled over to affect many people's logical thinking.

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/sports/sabres/a-dirty-late-hit-on-thompson-goes-unchallenged Zucker's response is in Paul Hamilton's column.

Utter nonsense. What broadcasts do you watch? He criticizes the Sabres for defensive coverage lapses all the time. And he also frequently points out the need to address "issues" when liberties are taken. He's never been reluctant to criticize the players and its play.

How so? Taking a Sabre off the ice because of a penalty would not have put the team in a better position to win. You have forgotten but the Sabres did get the win.