JohnC

I agree with your comment. And I believe that the proliferation of "Special Nights" dilutes the special nature of some causes. The organization can support a number of causes by community outreach efforts (which it does) instead of increasing the number of "Cause Nights".

I was talking about individual players. And I agree with the notion that there are too many causes and nights at sporting events. I'm not saying that they shouldn't exist, but I am saying that there are too many of them at these entertainment venues.

What would you do to a player who didn't want to participate in Pride Night? Would you punish him? I wouldn't.

Comrie was hurt for much of the season and it had an effect on his play. I'm not giving up on a young goalie such as UPL based on his play last year. It should be remembered that the expectation was for UPL to play the season in Rochester for further development. Because of injuries he was brought up sooner than expected. We shall see how the GM handles this position prior to training camp.

You misread or misinterpreted my comments. As far as forcing views on people it goes both ways. If someone for whatever reason, not necessarily religious but mostly so, doesn't want to participate in this designated celebration for whatever reason, then why should the player be forced to? Does a player who doesn't want to wear the pride uniform in warmups have a right to not be out there in warmups?I would say yes. I'm not extending this issue to the public or political arena. I'm addressing this issue of participation or not in a sporting venue. If a player doesn't want to participate, he shouldn't be forced to. I believe Lybushkin was the only player who didn't come out for the pride day warmup while everyone else did. I have no problem with that individual decision.

This issue should be brought up by the owners to the commissioner. This is a worthy topic to consider. They can do it individually or collectively. The issue isn't simple and can be a PR nightmare if not handled in a respectful and empathetic manner. You can still support the respective groups through community outreach instead of having so many dedicated "Nights". Sometime stoking the fires of controversy can be avoided by simply stoking fewer fires. I support the groups that are under discussion here. I also understand that there are players and fans who for a variety of legitimate reasons (mostly related to religion) who have a different view/perspective. Very often avoiding an issue is a good strategy to take, especially in an entertainment venue.

The GM was willing to trade a first round pick for Chyrun last year.

As you point out there are a lot of unknowns. Organizations prefer not dealing with unknowns. If you were a scout or in some way associated with a team, would you want to go to Russia and risk being arrested on some manufactured charged and be used as a hostage and trade chip? What a mess!

As you smartly point out sometimes less is more and less is better. There is a time and place to do and a time and a place to not do.

I don't think the issue is so much enlisting players for the military as it would be allowing people to leave Russia. I agree with @Buffalonill(unusual to do so) that the war and the internal conflict within the country is a potentially complicating feature to drafting Russian prospects. There is another aspect to this situation. Because of the situation that is getting more out of control by the day, the Sabres might be able to get a high end prospect at a lower draft spot because some teams would be reluctant to risk losing out on a prospect due to availability concerns.

You make a terrific point that the Sabres are in a good position to deal compared to most teams. And there is no question based on our roster and last year's performance that this team should be more appealing to players who will be moved. The negative perception of the organization has turned to a positive perception based on how it has recently played and the expected continued upward trajectory of this team in the near future. I'm hopeful and excited about the transactions that will be made to continue with this franchise's advance. Just a few judicious and impactful moves can make such a big difference.

I agree with the general tenor of your response with a slight difference. I see Levi as our primary goalie with Comrie and UPL vying for the backup spot. It gets somewhat complicated because of their status of being subjected to being claimed if sent to Rochester. That's the challenging situation that the GM has to deal with. Repeating what I have said before: the key to improving the play of our netminders is improving the overall defensive play of the players in front of him. Granato has openly stated that his first priority was to emphasize offense at the expense of defense. That was the first stage. Now, this team is at a more advanced stage where this team is at a higher competitive level. The team simply has to be more balanced on how it plays.

No.

I agree with you that the goaltending position is difficult to project because the mercurial nature of the position. Unless you have one of the few elite netminders there is a level of unpredictability that should make anyone uncomfortable. Almost everyone agrees that the caliber of last year's netminding was below average. And what everyone should also agree is that our blueline, especially the lower half, was below par and the unit lacked depth. But also, what is often not being mentioned here is that the forward lines were average to below average in their defensive play. My contention is that if the blueline is upgraded and the forwards in general play a more responsible two-way game, the goalie play should improve. The end of the season playoff run demonstrated that the team was capable of adjusting their game and playing a tighter brand of winning hockey against good teams. If the GM didn't have Levi, I would have had a much more dire view of the goalie situation. Are my expectations too high for him? Maybe. But from what I saw last year, I am very excited about him being able to immediately step in and play on a rotational basis as our primary goalie. While others are dismissing Comrie and UPL as players, I am not. My sense (guess) is that the GM, although willing to seek an upgrade, is not afraid to stand pat with his group if the price for a change can't be worked out. The majority of responders are clamoring for a change in net. That is a reasonable position to take. However, I see it otherwise. The issue for me is as much on the team's general defensive play as it is on the goalies.

I'm more than comfortable with working with the three goalies we currently have on the roster. I'm projecting Levi to be our #1 goalie with Comrie and UPL competing for the backup spot. Comrie was hurt for much of the year and was never able to get in a good rhythm. He should be a credible backup. Clearly, the Sabres had major deficiencies on the blueline that became dramatically worse because of the lack of depth. Getting another top 4 caliber defenseman and another third pairing player added to the unit is need even more important than bringing in another goalie. Maybe sometime in the season Ryan Johnson will be brought up to add depth to the unit some time in the season. There is no question that our goaltending was not adequate enough. But what made the stoppers more vulnerable is the play of the blueline and also the lacking team defense. I'm not adverse of giving up a first-round pick for a top tier defenseman who has some term on his contract. What I'm adamantly against is giving up significant assets for a goalie such as Helly who is on a one year contract. That makes no sense to me. If you want to see better goalie play, then address the blueline and stress more the defensive responsibilities of the lines.

Don Granato has said it many times that Mitts was one of the best players in the 2021 training camp. As you noted, he then got hurt and wasn't the same player that year. The coach knows what he's capable of and the value he has to the team. It's surprising that now that a player is playing to his potential there are people who want to deal him off.

I usually agree with your takes. Not on this issue. I wouldn't give up our first-round pick for a goalie or defenseman who was a one-year rental. I don't understand the concern for handiness. Who gives a dam! Whether it is a blueliner or a forward the determining issue is who are the better players. Right handed, left handed or ambidextrous are not so relevant in today's modern hockey which is fast paced with players skating on all sides of the ice.

You don't have to be a hockey insider to recognize the disorder that the Sabres were immersed in. Abject organizational and ownership incompetence were known by all who were in the business or followed the sport. The knockout stench couldn't be missed. The negative perception had nothing to do with the players. That was evident by the fact that all the players who wanted out of the mess had many prospective suitors pursuing them via trade offers.

The perception of Buffalo not being an attractive place had absolutely nothing to do with Eichel or any player. It wasn't a secret to the hockey world that Buffalo was a dysfunctional franchise. The organization had a long history and deserved reputation of being ineptly and chaotically run. (As you well know.) Not only did players not want to come here but also half the team here wanted out. It was never difficult to understand why Eichel, and many of his teammates, wanted out. Because of the constant churning of staff and revolting incompetency, this franchise was stuck in the mud with little hope of getting out of it. So it shouldn't be surprising that there was a thick cloud of negativity associated with such a woebegone franchise. It had little to do with the players as it did with the operation. Since KA took over the operation that ugly and well-deserved malignant reputation has changed for the positive. It certainly wasn't a quick change in perception but without question it has been altered. Where once many players had Buffalo on their "do not play franchise list" that list has certainly shrunk. I'm not saying Buffalo is an appealing destination for everyone, but it is now a place where more players would consider coming here. Moving forward is better than moving backward or being miserably stuck.

I don't see pursuing a veteran center as being a priority on this offseason's wish list. It became less of a need since Krebs elevated his game and Mitts showed enough flexibility to also play center. For me, getting a second pairing defenseman is the top priority.

How is Eichel a factor in other players wanting to or not wanting to play in Buffalo? Player movement for a number of reasons is a part of the landscape in the pros (all sports) and now in the college game. The biggest factor in player movements revolve around the issue of the contracts $$.

There is another reason why Buffalo should be an appealing destination for many players: It's location. The proximity to Toronto and southern Ontario where many players and their families come from. Added to now being a very competitive team should also be attractive features for players on the move.

Now that he has signed a contract he will be told what to do. He gave up his right to vacillate when he signed on the dotted line. 😃

Is it safe to say that assume Ryan Johnson will at the camp?

As you rightly point out there are a variety of ways to build a team. What Vegas and Seattle have done (quickly accomplished) are related to the expansion system currently in place. What problem do you have with KA and how he has operated? Since taking over, a particular course has been set for the rebuild, and it is being followed. Look back when he took over and compare it to where this franchise is now. The team improved 16 pts from the previous year and was vying for a playoff spot up to the second last game in the season. So what problem do you have on how he is conducting his job?