JohnC

You have watched a lot of Sabre games with keen and discerning eyes. There is no doubt that the Sabres last year were prolific on offense. On defense they were simply too loose in their zone, irresponsibly so. It was fun and entertaining to watch. However, that's not the type of play that will be sufficient to get us in the playoffs. The addition of Johnson and Clifton should help. But unless the team places more emphasis on tightening up their game, they will fall short again. Granato has repeatedly stated that his first priority when he took over the team is to emphasize offense. Now this team has to a great degree mastered that part of the game. Now there has to be a shift to put more emphasis on the defensive side of the game. In their end of the season playoff run the team demonstrated that they could alter their game. Can they do it for much of this upcoming season? That's the big question.

I know I'm jumping the gun but I believe that Levi is very quickly going demonstrate that he is a good goalie, and with a little more time become a top tier goalie. What impresses me the most is his fearless and composed makeup. As was demonstrated in his short stint in our end of the season playoff run the big stage and pressurized environment was not too big for him. What makes me hopeful about this upcoming season is that the Sabres at the end of the season did demonstrate that they can play a tighter and more responsible two-way game. The Sabres were playing a lot of good teams in that end of the season sequence. In those meaningful games I never felt that we were outshined by the opposition. The key to success in this upcoming season is whether the team can adjust its game and collectively play a more responsible defensive style.

If your examples about Bailey and Fasching are supposed to underscore the argument that because you usually don't know for sure which prospects are going to develop into a bona fide NHL players, then their value isn't as great as one might think. That's a reasonable perspective to take. There is another side to this issue. Because one doesn't know for sure if and when a high draft pick is going to develop, then it might make sense to have a larger pool of these prospects and more patience in waiting to see which players are capable of becoming NHL players. As you well know, prospects develop at different rates. With some prospects you can quickly see the talent, while with others who may be late bloomers. For players in the late bloomer category it just takes more time to make a concluding judgment. Players such as Tage and Mitts took years before their talents came to fruition. Much of the delayed process can be attributed to physical development. It's apparent that KA values prospects and has collected a pool of them. And it's apparent that he is reluctant to deal his prospects (at least presently so) for more pro ready players. In general, I lean towards how the GM is accumulating and handling his pool of young players.

Goaltending is not a separate issue. It is inextricably linked to how the players in front of them are playing. Vegas went through at least four goaltenders this season because of injuries. Yet they won the cup. The end of the season for the Sabres demonstrated that this team is capable of playing a tighter game. Can they do it for a season? That's the defining issue.

People have different views. Very often, what seems to be a contrary view is in itself not necessarily a total repudiation of what the other party is saying. Sometimes it is simply looking at an issue and focusing on one aspect of it while the other party is focusing on another aspect of the issue. Sometimes the differences aren't as glaring as it seems.

This back and forth is getting too exhausting to continue on. You have your view and I have my view. They don't intersect. That's okay.

I agree with you that the "impending catastrophe" description is hyperbolic. And you are correct that my response on the goalie issue is repetitive, maybe to the ad nauseum level. But you need to exhibit a little more self-awareness in recognizing that your position on this issue has also been repeatedly made. Maybe not to my ad nauseum level but approaching it. My position is a minority position. Whenever the goalie issue is discussed an overwhelming majority end up calling for new blood in the net. I do not have the same view. And up to this point, neither does the GM. If that bothers you, then ignore it and don't respond to it. There's no need for the eye roll emoji because I'm sure you get what I'm saying.

There is little doubt that playing a less freewheeling offensive style of hockey will lower the offensive stats. So what! The template to follow is the tighter style that the Sabres played at the end of the season. Against good teams in a playoff environment the team had a good record. Can the Sabres alter their style of play this season? That's the bigger issue and question. Is the GM going to bring in outside help for the lines? Probably not. And to his credit he did add Johnson and Clifton to the blueline. Is the GM going to bring outside help for the goalie position? I don't think he will. Many observers here believe that if he doesn't it will be an impending catastrophe. I'm not in that lamenting group. The biggest issue (for me) is team defense. That's my main concern.

I'm aware that I'm going against the grain here. I contend that the team defense issue is more important than the goalie issue. Obviously, they are interlinked. In my view, the goalie staffing has been upgraded with the addition of Levi. Am I being presumptuous? Admittingly so. And with the hope/expectation for tighter play of the team, the play of the goalies should also improve. I'm certainly not making the claim that our goalie unit is elite. We're not. But the key to getting better revolves around how this team plays a more responsible two-way game.

Is Levi an upgrade in net? I would say so. How good are our core 4 players? If you put Tage, Tuch, Skinner, Dahlin, Cozens and Power (stretching out the core) I would say they will continue to be good, if not better, because Tuch, Cozens, Power and Dahlin still have some upside to their game. You smartly homed in on what I consider to be the critical issue that will determine whether this team takes the next step forward or gets stuck in the fringe playoff pack i.e. how does this offensive minded unit collectively adjust their style of play and play without the puck. In my opinion, playing a more responsible two-way team game is a more critical issue than even our goaltending issue.

I didn't expect you to.

Quinn and JJ were two players I hoped would make the leap this year. I'm hoping that after his tournament play this year JJ would come into camp roaring to go.

What's the time frame for Quinn's return? Is it more likely than not that he will not be able to return to form this season?

What's the average price of gasoline in Canada? Just curious.

Having an excess of talent in the prospect pool is not something to worry over; not having an adequate enough pool is something to be concerned with. As others have said, most of the high-end prospects in our system are still another year or two away from being ready for the NHL. And internal competition within the system is a good thing for developing players. Also, having an abundance of prospects gives the organization more assets to trade when trying to better balance and improve the NHL roster.

One of the things that will make this season fun to follow is watching to see how players such as Greenway and Krebs play. I thought that Krebs noticeably elevated his game by becoming more structured and disciplined after being put on the Okposo/Girgs line. Greenway is another player who should be starting off the season healthy and well-conditioned. Understandably, there is a lot of interest on who was added to the roster. However, the biggest factor for success will be internal improvement. That's what I will be keying in on.

Moving Mitts into Quinn's spot seems to make the most sense. It allows Mitts to play on a higher line and puts him on a better position to produce points. I also like your idea of Krebs moving up to another line where he can be more offensively engaged. What's apparent is that coach Don G will have a lot of options when assembling and juggling lines.

I don't think he had much interest in bolstering the forward ranks this offseason from the outside. His focus was on the blueline. He added Clifton and Johnson to that unit. Was it enough? I'm not sure.

Probably so. I believe that Levi is going to be the primary goalie with UPL and Comrie competing to be the backup. Odds are that UPL will win the competition between them. As you well know I have felt for a long time that the GM was not going to make a significant move to address the position. Usually before a trade is made there are rumors or rumblings about a targeted player. I haven't heard a whisper yet about a goalie the Sabres are interested in. Have you? I just think that Levi's performance in his end of season stint influenced how the GM viewed the position for the next season. The bigger issue for me is better team defense. As has been stated before: We shall see.

We'll just have to wait to see what will happen on the goalie front. On the other hand, I do agree with you that the GM misread and mishandled the Ullmark situation. If he could have retained him, the Sabres would have been a playoff team last year and our current prospects would be more solidified.

Just curious. Why do you say that the organization's assessment of UPL is lower than their public posture? I take the opposite view. If it had a low expectation for UPL, the GM would have been more aggressive in the offseason to address the position. It's still the offseason so there's time to bring in another goalie. I just don't see it happening. My sense is that Levi and UPL are going to be our goalie tandem when the season starts.

The Sabres had a winning record last season, 42-33-7. And they accomplished that winning record with one of the youngest rosters in the league. We are going in circles and the discussion is not productive. We simply have different perspectives. A few years ago, the Sabres were one of the worst teams in the league and were an irrelevant NHL franchise. And to make things even worse we were a boring team. That's not the case now. There's a process to getting better and becoming a serious team. It's not automatic and takes time. As far as I'm concerned, the GM is one year ahead of the schedule that I thought it would take to rebuild this ramshackle franchise and make it a factor in the league.

With respect to your characterization of my position you are grossly off the mark. What has the GM accomplished over the past three years (not counting his first year because of Krueger's influence in hockey operations)? The GM has rebuilt the front office, the scouting department, the analytical department and selected the current HC to guide the young roster. By any common-sense measure that's a success. The team gained 16 points from the previous year with one of the youngest rosters in the league. By any common-sense measure that's a success. Our farm system is acknowledged to be one of the best in the league. That's a success. The characterization that I'm a fanatical fawning fan of this current GM because I'm a biased hometown fan is way off the mark. I'm basing my opinion on performance. You don't get to being a top tier team without going through the hard steps of getting better. And that's exactly the process that this franchise is undergoing. It can't be questioned that much has been accomplished in a relatively short period of time. Obviously, more needs to be done. My expectation is that the Sabres will be a playoff team this season. It's the same expectation that the organization and most fair-minded fans of this team have. That's not based on blindness as it is based on realism.

I have said on a number of occasions that my time frame for expecting this team to be a playoff team is next season. That has nothing to do with peacocking any glorious optimism. I say yes he has; he says no.

Then what assumption are you making? My view is more upbeat based on what has transpired the past couple of years, especially how the team played last year. Your view is more pessimistic based on what has transpired the previous five years. I want to make a point in response to people who disagree with my take. I understand your lesser optimistic viewpoints and appreciate them. It's a very understandable stance to take. It's not difficult to understand why others have their different views. I will go as far to say that when others disagree with my position I seriously consider why they disagree and why they have a different perspective. That's how you grow.