JohnC

If Skinner can be a 25-30 goal scorer on a third line, that would be terrific. I'm assuming he would get PP time in order to get into that scoring range as a third line player. How Ruff handles Skinner is an intriguing issue. As is how Skinner adapts to Ruff and what he expects from his new coach. As you point out, he is more of a lone ranger player than someone who blends in well with his line mates. But there is great utility in having a goal scorer who doesn't play on either of the top two lines.

I'm open to trading our first pick and other prospect assets. But if the Sabres were to do that, I would expect the return to be a player who is a second-line talent who would immediately help us. A player could be a second-line talent yet play on the third line and move up when needed, as Mitts did. The Sabres traded an extra second round pick to acquire Greenway. In my view, a few of those type of deals that bolsters the lower lines would make this team more balanced and in general better.

I'm not looking for a smashing singular deal that will alter the course of this flailing franchise. That's an unrealistic expectation. What I'm looking for are a few deals/transactions that cumulatively make this team better. Most of the roster spots are already designated. The hope is that there will be internal improvement from players already on the roster supported by an upgraded bottom half of the roster that will better balance out this roster i.e. make it a tougher team to play. There is an assumption/hope that these cumulative moves will be augmented with better coaching. I doubt that there is going to be an eye-popping deal that is going to dramatically alter the course of this team.

Maybe I have misinterpreted @dudacek's comments but he seemed to say that our top two lines, however they are constituted, need to improve their play from last year. Does that necessarily mean some of those members need to be dealt to bring a change to those lines? You believe so while I don't necessarily believe that to be the case. Although I'm open to it if a deal or two at that level can be made. My preference would be to deal our top pick and prospects to get that type of deal done rather than shedding a player or two from our top lines. I've listened to KA on more than a few occasions since the season ended. It seems to me that his focus is on upgrading the lower lines and balancing out the roster with some tougher/grittier players. Will those type of moves be adequate enough to change the dynamic of this team? I recognize that your response is absolutely not. My response is that I'm not sure.

The Sabres could definitely use a player who has the ability to hover around the net and bang loose pucks in. Surprisingly, although Benson hasn't scored many goals, he is one of our best players around the net.

I and most people agree with you that our core underperformed last year. Your position is not a minority position. But I don't see the core that you previously listed changing very much. I can't say for sure how the top two lines are going to be constituted but it's likely that the lines will be made up from your list. My sense is that KA is not going to stray from the core that he has assembled. He seems to be saying in a variety of forums that his focus of attention is going to be on upgrading the lower lines. For the most part, I agree with that approach. Will the GM be more aggressive this offseason to bring in a top two-line player? I'm not sure that he will.

Gabe Kaplan, the actor and one of the creators of the show, became a professional poker player. https://www.google.com/search?q=actor+gabe+kaplan+vegas+gambler&oq=actor+gabe+kaplan+vegas+gambler&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i160l4.13426j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I don't believe that the supposed core players that you listed are the biggest question marks entering next season. The bigger issue is whether the GM will be able to add the right support players to a roster that already has most of the core players on the roster. Most of the listed players should have even more upside. The critical issue most analysts point to whenever the Sabres are discussed relate to the third and fourth line players that are needed to better balance out the roster, meaning players who play a tougher and grittier style of game. You bring up an intriguing issue associated with the coaching change. How much of a difference will Lindy make working with this roster compared to a Granato coached team? I think the coaching change with Lindy will show more structure and player accountability (playing time based on performance) should be more evident.

Back to the future. 🙃

@LGR4GM, from a style of play does Savoie resemble Briere at all?

If the GM could add a couple of Greenway type players, I would be happy. Greenway is a big player who plays a heavy and strong style of game. He doesn't get bumped off the puck or pushed out of position, and he gives us strong net presence when in the offensive zone. There is nothing flashy about his game. But he is the type of player that we need more of. I'm not overemphasizing size as I'm emphasizing style of play. Benson is far from being one of our biggest players but without question he is one of our grittier players. We need more of them.

To his credit, the GM has accumulated enough talent within the system to use them as chips for a trade. He also has the ability to go to the free agent market and acquire players who add attributes (mostly physicality) to significantly upgrade the lower half of the roster and better balance this roster. I would certainly be open to trading our first pick as part of a deal to bring in a first or second-line caliber of player. From an overview perspective, we have enough talent to fill out our top two lines. And I believe that our blue line has enough talent to put together suitable pairings. It's the third and fourth lines that need to be significantly fortified. What I'm not in favor for is blowing up this roster with so called blockbuster PR deals that deplete the talent base and end up setting us back again. (We have done that already.) For me, it's not so much about being dramatically bold as it is being wise and judicious.

You look at the talent that was dealt to start over and rebuild our roster. The list includes Eichel, Rheinhart, Montour, Ullmark etc. and to a lesser extent Mitts who all are on Cup contending teams. (Eichel was on a cup winning team last year.) The return was mostly for futures (picks), also including young players such as Tage, that took time to develop. That phase of the rebuild or reconstruction is now over. Our GM has talked a lot about this new phase of competitiveness. Unless multiple players are added to this unbalanced roster, this franchise will continue to be stuck and remain being an inconsequential franchise with a withering fan base. (Compare the hockey fanbase to the Bandit fanbase!) Some people are looking for a blockbuster deal that brings in a high-profile player. I'm not one of them. What I expect at the minimum are at least three good players (Greenway type players) added who fill out the third and fourth lines and play a tougher brand of hockey. Would I give up a first-round pick and a high-end prospect for a Cirelli type player? Yes. The GM has to demonstrate that he knows the difference between adding talent and molding a serious team together.

It was Bobo Brazil. https://www.google.com/search?q=wrestler+bobo+brazil&oq=wrestler+bobo+b&aqs=chrome.0.0i355i512j46i512j69i57j0i22i30l7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I watched most of the game. I'm not knowledgeable enough on the sport to intelligently comment about the play. What I can say as a sports fan is that this was an entertaining game to watch. What was impressive and stood out to me is that the house was packed and the fans were into the game from the start to the finish. It seemed as if 80% of the fans were wearing Bandit gear. Maybe someday soon our hockey team can elevate their play and earn their way into having a consistently packed arena with an engaged audience. We still have a way to go to get to that point.

From what you point out he wouldn't be a good add on. But this team needs a tough and hard player to play against added to our roster, especially on the lower lines.

I agree with you and @LGR4GM that it is unlikely that the top six players will be moved. As of now, I'm not sure how he is going to configure the second line, assuming JJP remains on the top line with Tage and Tuch. It's likely that Quinn, Cozens and maybe Benson will be on the line. The biggest need frequently mentioned by others is a legitimate 3C and a big winger. I would love to see a player like the Caps' winger, Tom Wilson, who can provide some toughness and scoring ability to this lineup. This is a player that @LGR4GM has mentioned in prior posts. Someone else mentioned Washington's Strome. The Caps are going to through a transition where they need to add some young talent. We do have assets to get a deal like this done.

The open question for me is what happens if he does have an "eye popping" camp (your words)? What I can say about Benson is that whenever I watched him, I never felt that he was a liability. Quite the contrary, although his offensive stats were not impressive, his overall play was sound. In a season of a number of disappointments, he was a decisive positive for us. I'm not arguing one way or the other about Savoie making the big club. Whether he does or not the GM still needs to add more veterans from the outside.

Is Savoie a Rochester player next year? Or does he have a chance to make the big club like Benson did with a stellar camp? Also, can he play both the wing and center positions in the NHL level?

Your vision is simply more jaundiced than mine our.

The issue isn't so much trying hard as it is being wise and smart. The accumulation of good decisions are more likely going to give you good results; and the accumulation of offsetting bad decisions are correspondingly not going to give you good results. No organization in any sport is always going to make the right decisions. However, on balance front offices that are more astute than their competitors win out. What is frustrating about the Sabres and how they have been run is that the system is designed for the less talented teams to have advantages over the more talented teams. This is primarily done through the draft and by having first preference in the waiver system. We still have been mired in the much of mediocrity. That's not acceptable. I'm not a hardened pessimist. I really believe that if our front office makes a number of good personnel decisions this offseason, this team will do well next year. I honestly don't believe that this team is far away from being a good team. The Sabres have been intermittently good. That's not good enough.

I recently watched the Bandits play on TV in a playoff game. The house was full and the fans were engaged. The Bandits won the game in overtime in a dramatic fashion. It's a shame that the hockey fanbase has been subjected to such a lengthy period of mediocre hockey. The organization has to make a concerted effort this offseason to improve the team and give the fans a realistic chance for success. I'm confident the fanbase will positively respond if the organization demonstrates that it is serious about putting out a worthy product.

I disagree that Granato's interview from a stylistic standpoint is similar to Ruff's approach in an interview. There certainly was a distinction between a Krueger interview from a Granato interview. And it shouldn't be surprising that there is a difference in style between Granato and Ruff. When I have listened to Granato there seems to be an emphasis on the learning process for players. It made a lot of sense because he was playing a lot of young players. The Sabres were in a rebuilding process and there was a commitment to it. Ruff is in a different situation in that the rebuild is more advanced with his takeover. So now there is a greater emphasis on outcome and individual accountability than before. It seems to me that the franchise is at a different point in the rebuilding process where now the focus is now more directed to the present than the future. Don't misunderstand my point. I'm not criticizing Granato in this comparison to the succeeding coach. Each coach was and is in a different situation. And how they each responded to their respective situations shouldn't be a surprise that it is different.

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/authors/jeremy-and-joe-show Within this WGR link is a 20 min interview with Lindy Ruff on the morning show. There was nothing surprising about what he said. He talked about Tage and Cozens, and noted that he had some extensive conversations with Dahlin. He had some interesting comments about in a long season when your team doesn't have its A-game, as all teams have, it's important to grind out some points that add up over a season. There is a distinct contrast between a Granato interview with a Ruff interview. Granato often talked about the learning process for players that they have to go through. Considering the young players he had to worked with, that approach made sense. But now, for the most part, that stage of developing players has changed to being held accountable for your current play and less attention to your future play. A Ruff interview is straightforward and easy to comprehend. Plain talk and clarity.

The one thing that I am not arguing for is adding a rookie center to the roster. My preference is to add a good 3C player who adds an element of physicality. The GM also needs to upgrade the fourth line with players from the outside who are more physical and tenacious. Adding those types of players (2-3) is attainable. You make good point regarding Byram and his future contract. I would rather be in a position to have a talented defensive player and juggle contracts and players to fit that echelon of player. If Byram becomes a first or second pairing player, he will get paid like one. If one stands back and reviews our defensive group (including Ryan Johnson), a reasonable assessment is that it is a quality group. That's a dramatic upgrade from a few years ago. That's not something to complain about----it is something to celebrate. All teams with talented rosters have to make tough decisions on who to keep and who to pay. That's a byproduct of the cap system (for all pro sports). I would rather be in that position because we have an abundance of talent than have a low salary structure due to a dearth of talent.