JohnC

You are making an assumption that the Sabres are going to have a disappointing season this year. I have a different view. It's not based on irrational optimism. You act as if time was squandered by playing the younger players for developmental reasons. That's where you and I part company. It was the willingness to play the younger players at the expense of playing more veteran players that puts me in the optimism camp rather than the demoralized camp. Cozens, Quinn, Samuelsson, Power, Levi, JJP and Mitts to a lesser extent etc. accelerated their development because they played on a team that looked toward the near future than the present. I'm sure that's upsetting to some. It's not to me. At least to me, it was the right course of action to take.

I don't know anyone who believed that entering the season last year that the Sabres were a playoff team, especially after the Krueger carnage. I'm comfortable in saying (speaking for myself) that last year was an entertaining and successful season. I agree with you that the NHL is a performance-based business. I can positively say that the team outperformed my expectations.

I am going to use the word success because I believe rebuilding a team into a contending team takes time and is a process. In my view, the Sabres had a successful season last year. Were there disappointments? Of course. But in general, it was a successful season and left me encouraged entering this season.

You have a unique vantage on the Sabres because you are following them from afar and are able to receive more outside commentary. Most of the out-of-town commentators that I listened to when watching the opposing team's coverage were usually complimentary about the team and its near future prospects. Would you consider a 96 point season a failure? Every year there are a few teams that are racked with an inordinate number of injuries. If that happens to the Sabres and they aren't able to make the playoffs, then is the season a failure? There are no guarantees.

What deal did you want the GM to make last season? He attempted to trade for Chycrun, and was willing to give up a first round pick (reported). The deal wasn't consummated because Ottawa wanted more. So he declined. That was the right move. As it turned out he kept the first-round pick and used it to draft Benson. Most commentators believed that it was a good pick. It's often repeated that the future is not guaranteed. That's not a revelation to anyone. I'm sure that the GM looked at the goalie options this offseason. Which one do you think is a difference maker? Some people were advocating for Hellebuyck. Hell no! I'm not giving up valuable assets for a rental. There were those who were advocating for trading for Saros. As far as I know he wasn't on the trade market. And if he were the price would be exorbitant. Again, hell no! The point you make about KA's way not bearing fruit is inconsistent with what is actually going on. The Sabres improved by 16 points from the previous year with one of the youngest rosters in the league. If that is not an indication of being on a steep upward trajectory, then what standard are you using? If you consider immense improvement to be a failure, then you and I are using different measuring sticks. If you strongly desire to see more moves this offseason, I'm confident that you are going to be deeply disappointed. Listen to what the GM says. There is no hidden agenda. What he says is what he does.

Our core is for the most part developed. The team improved by 16 points from the previous season. The argument that this franchise has failed for 15 years so the GM has to take a radical route to pursue success is a bogus argument. Our current GM had full authority to run the organization for three years. (In his first year, Krueger had a lot of authority). Our GM has done a superb job in the short stint he has overseen the operation. What more do you want? If you want to see magic you should go to a magic show where creating an illusion is the act. That has nothing to do with the reality of pro sports.

I have no problem being double-teamed. There's nothing wrong with that. What you are basically saying is that we won't know for sure what the best approach is until we see the results. That's like saying water is wet. Of course that is obvious and true. We are all giving opinions here. The notion that KA is playing a dangerous game is an odd thing to say. His team improved by 16 points from the previous season. And that was done by playing one of the youngest rosters in the league. This franchise is clearly on the right course. How anyone can say that the GM is playing a dangerous game is very befuddling.

That's my point. Although I understand your caution. What I'm emphasizing in my previous response is that the front office hasn't pursued a quick-fix approach for a short-term gain. Rather, it is doing things the right way with a longer-term perspective. Draft picks are not being dealt for immediate help. Instead, players are being drafted and developed. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that under KA the operation has been well managed.

Perspicacious.

I disagree with your characterization that he has had a pedestrian summer. There shouldn't be a surprise that he was mostly going to rely on the players already on the roster and in the system because that is, and has been, his strategy in rebuilding the roster since he took over. He has repeatedly stated since he took over that was how he was going to rebuild the roster. And there is no question that the return he has gotten from dealing off the old core has accelerated the rebuild. Is the addition of Johnson and Clifton enough to buttress our blueline, a unit that was thin last season? Maybe. Is the GM taking a risk by not adding another goalie? Yes. For me, the bigger issue is whether the team in general can play a more responsible game. I will even go as far as to say that our defensive play in general is a bigger issue than how our goalies play. I recognize that this is a minority view here. I don't expect that there will be more transactions prior to the season. With respect to your questioning last sentence: Absolutely yes! Don Granato's priority this season is on winning and less so on development. And as you have pointed out in prior posts: He has so stated that.

I'm basing my positive contracts comments that include and go beyond the Tage deal. Cozens rich contract was certainly based on a projection. But making it wasn't a challenge based on his steady improvement and last year's breakout performance that included 31 goals and 68 points. The Samuelsson contract is certainly based on a projection but it is not too difficult to see what his value is to this team. Johnson, Lyubushkin, Girgs and Okposo are not anchor players by any means. But I would say that all of these players who are on now on one-year deals are well worth their contracts. None of the players you listed are on what I would consider excessive contracts. And even if one felt that they were, they are mostly on expiring contracts that won't have much drag when negotiating with the prime players whose contracts are coming up. I agree with you that in the not too-distant future the contract judgments will become more challenging. But that's the point. The GM has put himself in a good position to sign his top tier players, such as Dahlin, because he has been prudent in how he has handled negotiating contracts up to now.

You are not the only one excited about the upcoming season. What makes the hometown hockey situation even more exciting is that this team is in a good situation to have sustained success. Also, there is the recognition that this franchise is being run in a very competent manner. There is a stability and solid foundation that now exists that didn't previously exit in this previously erratically run franchise. It took a while for the new owners to learn that there were no quick fixes in each of their franchises. It appears that the Pegulas have learned from their mistakes. It's a good time to be a Buffalo sports fan.

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/hosts/sabres-live In the Shayna Goldman segment she talks about the Wilson signing and contract. She was scathing in her criticism for the amount and especially for the extended term. The one thing that KA has done well is how he has handled contracts.

What would you be willing to give up for him? And what do you think that Edmonton would want in a trade? If they asked for Tage, Quinn, JJ and Samuelsson would you deal? I wouldn't. If they asked for Tage, Quinn and JJL, I still would decline.

I have often stated my position that I don't believe that the GM is going to add another goalie to the mix. For the reasons you stated, I have to be candid that I'm queasy about the position entering the seasons.

Twitter and social media in general are replete with snide and snarky comments. It's a junkyard environment. It's not a place where diplomacy and genteel civility abound. Some bars are known to have a raucous and rough environment while other bars may have a more sophisticated and upper crust to them. So, it shouldn't be surprising that MH's comments in this setting had some bite to them. Considering where Harrington made his post, I think you are over-reacting to his blunt comments that reflect what he thought. I didn't see anything wrong with what he said considering where it was said.

In general, your point that prospects are given preference over veterans is clearly evident based on the recent history. However, I think that the GM and staff have come to the recognition that this team is at a stage where it should not only be competing for a playoff spot but is a playoff caliber of team. If Comrie decisively out performs UPL in camp and in preseason, I see him winning the backup role. And if UPL decisively, or even is comparable, in his competition with Comrie in camp, I see him winning the backup role. From a broad organizational overview, this franchise has gone beyond the team building and player development stage to the team competing against the best teams in the league. Player growth is important but now winning is the priority.

The issue isn't so much whether Boston will be as good as they were last year. That is unlikely. As you point out they lost a number of contributing players. It's clear from a roster standpoint they won't be as good as they were. The more intriguing issue is whether this year Buffalo will be better than Boston. From an overall talent comparison, I do believe that the Sabres do match, if not surpass them. Of course, they do have a noticeable edge in net. The issue is: can Buffalo alter its more free-wheeling offensive style and play a more responsible two-way game. If they can, then Buffalo surpassing Boston isn't an outlandish notion.

As you point out, the Bruins have a distinct advantage in net, the most important position in the game. When you compare the two teams it is a mistake to become overly enamored with our offensive talent without factoring in the overall defensive deficiencies of that same prolific group. That's where Boston has a distinct advantage. Their team advantage that includes the forwards, blueliners and goalies clearly resides with Boston. I'm hoping and expecting that our team will modify its style of play where there is more emphasis on team defense, even if it is at the expense of offense. If the Sabres can make that adjustment, then it is not a stretch to believe that the Sabres can come closer to matching Boston from a team point standpoint.

Hockey has some unique traits that are not as prevalent as other sports. As you point out, because of the exceptional play of your goaltender, although your team is thoroughly outplayed, can result in a win. Conversely, your own team can thoroughly outplay the opposition, and you can still lose because of a flukish goal from an unintentional deflection off of your own player's skate. There are more flukish plays that affect the outcome than in many other sports. Over a long season, it usually balances out.

What's self-defeating about your example of blatant age discrimination is the reality that for the most part younger workers don't have loyalty to the companies they work for. If there is a better opportunity while employed, the employee will move on. I'm not making a criticism because it is a rational adjustment to the current employer/employee relationship. The disposable worker realizes their vulnerable situation and accordingly adjust by pursuing their individual interest. The irony is that it is more probable than not that you, as an older worker, would do a better job and would end up staying longer than the younger worker. As you demonstrate that discrimination comes in many forms. In the end it works against the discriminator. Good luck to you.

If Donnie G would have been the hire instead of Krueger, how much better would the team be? When he assumed stewardship of the team, he moved Tage to center and in short order revitalized Skinner's sunken career. The coach has made a number of smart moves when dealing with young talents. One of his best moves was putting Krebs in between Okposo and Girgs. That move placing him between two veteran players altered his game and made him play a more disciplined and tighter game that was suitable for the NHL.

The problem with "we should have won" these games approach to reviewing the past season is that every team has the same "we should have won" these games. It's a long and grinding season that includes long and exhausting road trips and not always well known injured/impaired players. It's simply part of the season. What often isn't noted in these type of "we should have " reviews is the recognition that the Sabres won a number of games that they were fortunate to have won. The vicissitudes of a season are experienced by every team in the league. The bottom line is that your record is your record.

Why do you think that there will be more moves for the Sabres this summer? If a goalie trade or transaction isn't made, then what other positions do you think will be addressed? I would love to see another 4/5 defenseman added to the blueline mix. However, I'm not confident that it will happen. Other than the additions of Johnson and Clifton, this has been an uneventful offseason. My sense is that is what KA wanted.

You don't have to be cynical to believe that the GM really didn't expect to make the playoffs last year. The team's end of the reason playoff press was probably not expected by most people associated with the franchise, including the fans. Speaking for myself, I consider them to be one year ahead of the planned rebuild timetable. Next year is a different situation. If this team doesn't make the playoffs, I will be very disappointed. No more excuses.