game discussion thread GDT: Buffalo @ Philadelphia, 7:30 PM ET, 10/25/2016, NBCSN

[bob_sauve28]

at last moulson is doing what I said, having a 30 goal season.

30? He's having a 60 goal season! 

[North Buffalo]

I totally disagree with Moulson that the Sabres "gave it to them." Philly TOOK it. Huge difference, Matty Mo. Our lack of speed on both the front and back ends was exposed. Again. 

 

GMTM has to see that there are issues unrelated to missing Eichel and Kane, right?

 

Speed issue is only relevant if the Sabres dont play physical. Difference is not so much if Sabres play with an edge, but they have yet to do so for three periods except against the Oilers.

[bob_sauve28]

What the hell happened?

The sh** the bed in third against a team that played the night before while Sabres had four days off. I'm not into the emotional coaches but when it became a one goal game I would of blown up at the team the way they were playing. DB should have become unglued and screamed a bit. They just looked so pathetic in the last 5 minutes 

[RonHextallsShoulderPads]

i was watching the highlights on dtmts.com and the second the flyers scored the 2nd goal i knew that they were going to come back and win. 

[K-9]

Speed issue is only relevant if the Sabres dont play physical. Difference is not so much if Sabres play with an edge, but they have yet to do so for three periods except against the Oilers.

I really want to embrace this. 

 

Really. 

The sh** the bed in third against a team that played the night before while Sabres had four days off. I'm not into the emotional coaches but when it became a one goal game I would of blown up at the team the way they were playing. DB should have become unglued and screamed a bit. They just looked so pathetic in the last 5 minutes 

They play like DD coaches. Lindy would be bag skating their quitting butts today. DD will probably take them to the movies. 

[beerme1]

The sh** the bed in third against a team that played the night before while Sabres had four days off. I'm not into the emotional coaches but when it became a one goal game I would of blown up at the team the way they were playing. DB should have become unglued and screamed a bit. They just looked so pathetic in the last 5 minutes 

 

I would have at least called a time out and told them to get their together.

[K-9]

I would have at least called a time out and told them to get their ###### together.

Yep. And to quell Philly's momentum. It looked like the Flyers were on a PP the entire 3rd period, even before we took the penalties. DD'd got to have a better grasp of the ebbs and flows of the game. 

[3putt]

For sure, the Sabres will do better with Eichel.  Kane?  He's been disappointing so far.   

 

The thing is;  Eichel can't carry the team.  Maybe they won't be at the bottom of the Atlantic, but will they actually have a realistic shot at competing for a wildcard?  

 

Also, Murray promised a fast turn around;  but it's not looking all that fast at this juncture.    The lack of depth and scoring ability on the team, outside Eichel, O'Reilly, and Reinhart, is rather sad.   

 

And the lack of defense helping the offense is a big issue;   Bogosian ($5.2 million) and Gorges ($3.9 million)  between them - they haven't even scored a point yet after 5 games.  But they didn't do much last year either, so this really shouldn't be a surprise to the general manager.    

Your are wrong.  Murray did not promise a fast turnaround. He said he does not believe in 5 year rebuilds.  That is not a promise of any kind.  The maturation of young players is beyond his control.  You also ignore his other comments where he said the goal is to build a sustainable team capable of perpetually winning it all.  That takes time.  Be angry you don't get immediate gratification with a first round exit.  But be accurate if you are going to attribute comments to someone.  

[That Aud Smell]

Murray did not promise a fast turnaround. He said he does not believe in 5 year rebuilds.  That is not a promise of any kind.  

 

Hmm. I'm not so sure that follows. My take when he said he wasn't a believer in the 5-year rebuild was that he fully planned, expected to be competing for playoff spots sooner than five years into his time with the team.

 

 

The maturation of young players is beyond his control.  

 

To a point, yes. But they're his players. It's his job to pick the players who will develop on a timeline that is in keeping with his plans for the club. And it's his coach who's developing those players. If they fail to develop on a schedule that is in line with something other than a 5 year rebuild, then that falls, to the extent it falls, on GM TM.

[3putt]

Hmm. I'm not so sure that follows. My take when he said he wasn't a believer in the 5-year rebuild was that he fully planned, expected to be competing for playoff spots sooner than five years into his time with the team.

 

 

 

To a point, yes. But they're his players. It's his job to pick the players who will develop on a timeline that is in keeping with his plans for the club. And it's his coach who's developing those players. If they fail to develop on a schedule that is in line with something other than a 5 year rebuild, then that falls, to the extent it falls, on GM TM.

It's his job to identify and select talent. You don't take a lesser talent who is more mature over a greater talent who is a year or two away.  

 

As to the first, believing something can be accomplished more quickly is not the same as promising to accomplish it more quickly.  Murray has repeatedly stated his goal is to get better everyday. He also said you build through the draft, trades and add free agents to get you over the top.  The first element requires time for prospects to develop.  And in his opening presses, he stated that the goal was not simply to make the playoffs but to be a perennial contender to win it all. I have issues with some of his moves in isolation,  but can see that he is playing a long game.  His extension probably means he has sold that vision to Pegula. 

[That Aud Smell]

It's his job to identify and select talent. You don't take a lesser talent who is more mature over a greater talent who is a year or two away.  

 

Talent is one thing. Temperament, motivation, work ethic, mindset are distinct from that. As is a player's ceiling and the likelihood of reaching it. Those are all on GM TM and his team to identify.

 

 

As to the first, believing something can be accomplished more quickly is not the same as promising to accomplish it more quickly.  

 

I think you're lawyering what he said, which is fine. I love lawyering.

 

But when you're the GM of a club and you say you don't believe in 5 year rebuilds, I'll venture that 19 out of 20 fans (49 out of 50?) who hear or read those words and consider them are inferring that your plan is to be in the playoffs and completing there in advance of that 5-year mark.

 

Maybe that's not what he intended to say when he said that, but I think that's what he fairly implied.

[Thorner]

It's his job to identify and select talent. You don't take a lesser talent who is more mature over a greater talent who is a year or two away.  

 

As to the first, believing something can be accomplished more quickly is not the same as promising to accomplish it more quickly.  Murray has repeatedly stated his goal is to get better everyday. He also said you build through the draft, trades and add free agents to get you over the top.  The first element requires time for prospects to develop.  And in his opening presses, he stated that the goal was not simply to make the playoffs but to be a perennial contender to win it all. I have issues with some of his moves in isolation,  but can see that he is playing a long game.  His extension probably means he has sold that vision to Pegula. 

 

Time, sure. But the players he selects do have to develop, and in a timely enough fashion that they are still here and not traded away when they do so. He needs to have the foresight to select the players that do reach their potential. 

Talent is one thing. Temperament, motivation, work ethic, mindset are distinct from that. As is a player's ceiling and the likelihood of reaching it. Those are all on GM TM and his team to identify.

 

 

 

I think you're lawyering what he said, which is fine. I love lawyering.

 

But when you're the GM of a club and you say you don't believe in 5 year rebuilds, I'll venture that 19 out of 20 fans (49 out of 50?) who hear or read those words and consider them are inferring that your plan is to be in the playoffs and completing there in advance of that 5-year mark.

 

Maybe that's not what he intended to say when he said that, but I think that's what he fairly implied.

 

Agreed with this. And I don't just think that the meaning from his comments was inferred, incorrectly. If he implied it, he intended it. 

[SwampD]

Well, I think the Sabres are at least doing something right. A 16 page GDT. Anyone remember the bad old days when there were a couple of 3 and 4 pagers?

[bob_sauve28]

Well, I think the Sabres are at least doing something right. A 16 page GDT. Anyone remember the bad old days when there were a couple of 3 and 4 pagers?

DB said the exact same thing in his post game presser ;)

[Neo]

I'd like to sit between Smell and 3putt at a cocktail party or barbecue ...

[3putt]

Hmm. I'm not so sure that follows. My take when he said he wasn't a believer in the 5-year rebuild was that he fully planned, expected to be competing for playoff spots sooner than five years into his time with the team.

 

 

 

To a point, yes. But they're his players. It's his job to pick the players who will develop on a timeline that is in keeping with his plans for the club. And it's his coach who's developing those players. If they fail to develop on a schedule that is in line with something other than a 5 year rebuild, then that falls, to the extent it falls, on GM TM.

Here are his exact words: “I want to rebuild here properly, which takes time. But it doesn’t have to take years.”

 

I don't read a promise anywhere in that statement. 

http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/gm-tim-murray-wants-higher-expectations-for-sabres-quick-rebuild/

[That Aud Smell]

I'd like to sit between Smell and 3putt at a cocktail party or barbecue ...

You're being kind.

 

Besides, when's the last time anyone wished to sit between a couple of lawyers?!

Here are his exact words: “I want to rebuild here properly, which takes time. But it doesn’t have to take years.”

 

I don't read a promise anywhere in that statement.

 

http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/gm-tim-murray-wants-higher-expectations-for-sabres-quick-rebuild/

"Murray interrupted a question at the mere mention of Regier and suffering.

 

'I wasn't here. I'm not using that word,' he said. 'This is not going to be a five-year rebuild, not for me anyway. That's not what I want.'"

 

http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/10787944/tim-murray-buffalo-sabres-not-five-year-rebuild

 

I spy with my little eye, a promise. (Edit: Or at least a called-shot. He said: Ain't gonna be a five-year rebuild. He may well have said more than he should have, or needed to.)

Edited October 27, 2016 by That Aud Smell

[Thorner]

That's pretty darn explicit. He doesn't even say "I don't want" a 5 year build. He says it won't be.

[bunomatic]

I've spent like most of you I'm sure all day steaming about that loss and in particular how they lost. Every team in the league when going into overtime plays to win. Why wouldn't you ? Bylsma coaches not to lose. Its like his team is protecting a lead instead of being aggressive and attacking. What have you got to lose at that point ? You escaped the 3 periods with 1 point and you're not going to lose that point if you lose o.t. so why play afraid to lose ? Play the game to win the extra point. Its maddening. Maybe he feels we don't have the horses to keep up 3 on 3 with some of the speedier teams ? I'm not sure but it appears thats the case. I don't like the strategy he has come up with to combat that. Protect a lead you don't have. Pray you can squeek into the shootout to lose anyways ? As for the shootout don't get me started.

[Thorner]

I've spent like most of you I'm sure all day steaming about that loss and in particular how they lost. Every team in the league when going into overtime plays to win. Why wouldn't you ? Bylsma coaches not to lose. Its like his team is protecting a lead instead of being aggressive and attacking. What have you got to lose at that point ? You escaped the 3 periods with 1 point and you're not going to lose that point if you lose o.t. so why play afraid to lose ? Play the game to win the extra point. Its maddening. Maybe he feels we don't have the horses to keep up 3 on 3 with some of the speedier teams ? I'm not sure but it appears thats the case. I don't like the strategy he has come up with to combat that. Protect a lead you don't have. Pray you can squeek into the shootout to lose anyways ? As for the shootout don't get me started.

Ya. It come across as incredibly illogical.

 

Generally I try to accept that Bylsma has reasons for what he does, that I often am just not in a position to understand as a fan, and don't have the resources he has access to. But I struggle in this case to think anything other than his OT strategy is deeply misguided.

[beerme1]

Ya. It come across as incredibly illogical.

 

Generally I try to accept that Bylsma has reasons for what he does, that I often am just not in a position to understand as a fan, and don't have the resources he has access to. But I struggle in this case to think anything other than his OT strategy is deeply misguided.

 

 

Poor DD. People rag on him for corsi this corsi that and he appeases them with a new strategy to maintain puck possession in ot by send the puck all the way back to our goalie and still he gets no love.

[Stoner]

Poor DD. People rag on him for corsi this corsi that and he appeases them with a new strategy to maintain puck possession in ot by send the puck all the way back to our goalie and still he gets no love.

The sarcasm is strong with this one.

[K-9]

Poor DD. People rag on him for corsi this corsi that and he appeases them with a new strategy to maintain puck possession in ot by send the puck all the way back to our goalie and still he gets no love.

I've got no problem what so ever with passing the puck all the way back to the goalie if it means getting three gassed players off the ice in OT, which is what I observed the other night. Possession rules in 3 on 3, especially when the other team is gassed. 

[Randall Flagg]

I've got no problem what so ever with passing the puck all the way back to the goalie if it means getting three gassed players off the ice in OT, which is what I observed the other night. Possession rules in 3 on 3, especially when the other team is gassed. 

Yeah. Now, I expect the goalie and defenseman to play it better once they're ready to go up ice again. Both times it happened we gave the puck away and almost got scored on. 

 

I like the idea in theory though.

[Neo]

You're being kind.

Besides, when's the last time anyone wished to sit between a couple of lawyers?!

 

Same as the last time anyone was right of me!