Archie Lee

With Allen the Bills have become a team that wins games in the double-digits annually and is a perennial contender. I think McDermott and Beane are smart though. Had they missed on Allen they would still have brought in a good veteran QB. Obviously not an elite level QB, but they would have brought in a Kirk Cousins, a Sam Darnold, or a Baker Mayfield, who they could make the playoffs with. With Beane and McDermott, I think the Bills are a team that more often than not is in the playoff hunt.

Fair enough. I pretty much agree, except for on the edges a bit. It isn’t so much that I think Adams’s plan was the only option. Rather, I think the outcomes of years 1 and 2 (ending with the 1 point playoff miss) were defendable and that there have been multiple points since then for a course adjustment. The inflection point for me was the off-season prior to 23-24 and the failure to make any meaningful off-season moves. Getting to within 1 point of the playoffs should have had the organization salivating to take the next step and leaving no potential area for improvement unexplored. Instead Adams had THE most complacent off-season imaginable and any cultural improvements that had been made through 22-23 were squandered. That he continues to double and triple down on this now clearly failed philosophy is mind-bending.

Yep. Can’t trade for anyone when things are going well because you don’t want to upset the apple cart. And can’t trade when things aren’t going well because you don’t want to do anything rash that will come back to haunt you. It’s a cycle that Adams has put himself in.

The initial idea (back to 21-22) of not blocking young players, held logic I think. In the early stages of a rebuild, there is no need to sign veteran UFAs to longterm deals that might both block younger players and make managing the cap in future years more difficult. The logic falls apart though, when you get to year 4 and you still are not a playoff team and you have so many prospects that they are effectively blocking each other. Isak Rosen is having the kind of year in the AHL that would put him on the radar for a role on any NHL team either as a call-up this year or as a player you would give a serious opportunity to next season. The idea of Rosen being added to our roster is preposterous. He would just make us younger and more timid and inexperienced. And with Quinn, Peterka, Benson and Kulich already on the team, there is no logical position. At this point, I can only assume that Adams is more crippled by fear of making a mistake and trading the wrong kids or for an unbalanced return, than he is driven by a commitment to winning.

Well said. I think every one of our players could play a role on a winning NHL team. This topic, in my view, should start and end with the owner and GM.

Any other guy stands up for a teammate, gets in a fight and the team responds with a tying goal and fans typically credit him with rallying the team. Cozens is the new whipping buy though.

How sad is it that our GM built a team where a young guy who isn’t great at fighting is about the only one who will stand up for a teammate in such a way.

Agreed that it is a potential solution. The other potential solution is to give him an extended period with two veteran players. Putting Cozens on the wing with two veteran linemates, would be ideal. Current roster construction makes these solutions challenging though. Even looking ahead to next season, in what alternate universe are we likely to have a top-nine that does not include Cozens, Benson, Peterka, Quinn and Kulich (with at least 3 in the top-six)? That's 4 players whose offensive numbers are down from a year ago (collectively, way down) and who are simply underperforming relative to expectations, and a 20 year old rookie with 3 goals (and points) in 19 games. Given the pedigree of all 5 of these players, an eruption in offensive production and significant improvement in overall two-way performance, is always a possibility. But all indications are that next season we will again be rolling the dice on the notion that a group of young players are going to do something at the NHL level that they have not consistently been able to do before. This does not bode well for Cozens, or for any of the other young players noted (or coming up), or for the franchise. If we are serious about winning and making the playoffs, I think 2-3 of these players need to be moved in acquisitions for more-ready-to-win-with-veterans. We would still be among the league's youngest teams. Unfortunately, all of these youngsters have seen their value diminished this year. As is, if we stick with this group of players, we cannot seriously claim that the playoffs are anything but a stretch target.

It likely comes down to how you define "lots of organizations". If 5 or 6 teams are calling on Cozens with some level of interest, I would say that's "lots of organizations". Friedman, for what it's worth, stated that Cozens contract is viewed as a positive by teams interested. For me, I'm nowhere close to wanting to move Cozens specifically. I have no strong objection to then trading any players outside of Dahlin and Luukkonen, but to keep me engaged in this season (already a challenge), it would need to be a hockey trade. Cozens for an established and legit top-6 player under 30 with term? OK. Preferably under 28 and needs to have at least two years of team control after this season. Sure, let's do it. To your point though, I think his value has almost certainly diminished. I suspect offers right now would include: a useful but declining middle-six vet who needs to be moved to make way for the Cozens cap-hit, a protected first, and a prospect on the edges of the team's top 10. Maybe only two of those. I can't imagine Adams would, and hope he doesn't, have any interest in such a deal.

Agreed. Up until the end of the 22-23 season I had bought into what Adams was selling. The first crack in the facade for me was the press conference that ended that season when Adams bristled with hostility when asked if the team missing the playoffs by 1 point was a missed opportunity. When no substantive moves were made that off-season and it became clear that they really were going to keep Benson on the roster, my confidence was significantly shaken. Now, he has left no doubt that he is just not up to the task.

If the current players were not the roster of the Buffalo Sabres, with all the associated baggage of bad ownership, toxic culture, mismanagement, and 14 years out of the playoffs, I think it would be an attractive opportunity for both experienced GMs and the hottest-up-and-comers. If you just take the 13 current roster players who are under contract for next season (Thompson, Cozens, Tuch, Lafferty, Krebs, Malenstyn, Benson, Kulich, Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson, Clifton, Luukkonen) and add Skinner's buy-out cost, you come in just under $62 million. That leaves what should be $30 million in cap space and a plethora of assets (from valuable UFA's that can be moved at this year's deadline, to RFA's that can be re-signed or traded, to a still well-stocked prospect pool, and a full slate of draft picks plus extra picks) that can be used as assets to fill in the roster holes . That doesn't mean that we should be fully committed to the 13 players under contract; 1 or 2 of them could be potential trade-bait also. I don't think it is a lost cause beyond this season. The pieces are there for a capable and qualified person to utilize.

I would be ok with Karmanos taking over in an interim basis and then reassessing at year end.

I agree that Ruff is not THE problem. We might disagree on whether he is a part of the solution, but I will concede that we could do much worse for a head coach. Generally an issue with the Sabres is they don’t operate like a normal NHL team. Normal NHL teams don’t fire a GM and then stick the new GM with the coach hired by the fired guy. It would be very Sabres-like to fire Adams and then limit the replacement options by requiring they accept Ruff as their head coach.

Sure, but that speaks to my point. It isn’t who we drafted but how we manage the asset after the draft. I am certain there are teams that would look at players like Cozens and Power and believe they could be so much better in a normal NHL environment.

A couple of things on this. 1.). I agree on Kadri. He is not the answer to fix this. One of the fall-out consequences of failing to make a move at the appropriate moment is that you risk things becoming so dire that it is too late for any move to have the intended positive impact. Had we traded for a player like Kadri in July, or a month ago, their presence may have helped prevent this recent swoon from becoming catastrophic. As is, there is no player who is going to pull us back into the playoff race. That doesn’t mean moves should not be made, but we are now in a position where making the playoffs would require a legendary in-season turnaround. There is no realistic trade that could reasonably result in that sort of change in expectation for this season. It is over. Trading for an aging over priced veteran now would be bizarre. 2.). I’m interested in your opinion on what a reasonable trade might be. I realize you are not the GM and it is not your job to build a winning team. But you are hard on Adams (rightfully), while also being a “hard no” on many trade options suggested (you were a hard no in the off-season on the idea of trading Quinn, Benson or Peterka for a veteran top 6 player; I think you were a hard no on trading for Brady Tkachuk, not that it was ever a realistic option). I respect your opinion, which is why I ask: what would be a meaningful and acceptable trade to you?

I couldn’t disagree more. Out 1st rd decisions have been the least of our issues. Of all our 1st rd picks, the only one firmly established as not being worthy of his place in the draft is Nylander. Every other pick you have listed has either proven worthy of their draft position or it is too early to draw a final conclusion. Remember when people didn’t think Reinhart had proven himself worthy of his draft position? The much bigger issue has been failing to surround these players with the depth, talent, experience, coaching, and culture that breeds success.

Hard to imagine Pegula wanting to pay Granato and Adams to not work, and possibly Ruff at some point. Though maybe Adams and Ruff could be reassigned. Is there someone in the organization (Guelli?) that Pegula would trust to run a GM search? It doesn’t seem like something Pegula is up for. You can’t “tear down” the youngest team in the league. But you can make changes through addition (trading picks, prospects, or one of our youngest roster forwards), or by trading one or two of our core players (signed long-term) in a “hockey trade”. At this point, any such move by Adams would be justifiably met by many fans with a “now you make a move?” or “too little too late” reaction. Not to mention, his best trade assets (other than the 1st rd pick) are depreciating before our eyes.

Same for me. Further, it ruins my interest in the NHL. If the Sabres were just in the hunt, I would follow the scores and watch some non-Sabre games to see how their competition looks. As is, I just can’t get myself to care. Still love hockey so will jump back in for the playoffs. But my interest in the NHL regular season for this year, is pretty much over.

I think we have officially reached the point in this season where no player who has a full NMC is waiving for the Sabres. There was talk this summer, I seem to recall, of Kadri being interested in coming back east. I thought then that he might consider the Sabres. That ship has sailed now though. Adams, or whoever is control behind the curtain, waited too long and the worst case scenario has developed.

My position is that Cozens, like almost every player who has ever played in the NHL, would benefit from playing with better linemates.

From Frozen Tools Line Combos, here are the top 7 wing-combinations (5v5) with Cozens at centre this season: 1.) Quinn/Benson 2.) Quinn/Kulich 3.) Krebs/Benson 4.) Peterka/Benson 5.) Peterka/Quinn 6.) Lafferty/Benson 7.) Kulich/Benson I'm not blaming these young players (or Lafferty!!) for Cozens' struggles. As I've said before, they all could use better linemates. But on the season we have paired Cozens almost exclusively with kids 23 and under. It's crazy. If we trade Cozens without getting back an established, legit, top-6 player, under 30 with term, then we have learned nothing.

Having a slender body type does not equal poor off-season work habits.

I think it is both. This is all largely attributable to there being no apparent synergy between what the GM is doing with player acquisitions and what the coaches are doing with those players. Botterill brings in puck-moving D and signs Skinner to a big contract and then hires a coach whose system has little use for such players. Adams trades Mittelstadt for another puck-moving D and then hires a coach whose defensive system is too complex for our remaining top 2 centres (for what it’s worth, I’m not sure Mittelstadt would be better in this system). These are just two examples.

Now we are drawing conclusions re: player fitness and off-season training based on somebody thinking Cozens looks skinny.

I agree. But we don't need to win 6-8 in a row. We need to play at 6-8 games over DeLuca .500 over the next 40-50 games. It's not going to happen because as an organization we are not prepared to do what it takes. And, you are correct, it would be a long-shot at this point even if we do decide to make the needed moves.