Fire Jason Botterill

[...]

14 hours ago, Iron Crotch said:

I wish I could have the blind optimism that some of you do, but the roster as it stands is awful. Certainly there is some young talent, but that is almost entirely a function of a steady stream of top-10 picks courtesy of sucking so badly for the past 7/8 seasons. The team got 20 points worse under Botterill/Housley last season…. and we just ditched two 20+ goal scorers from the lowest scoring offense in the league. I don't see why putting together the worst team in the league, lucking into the first overall pick via the draft lottery, then selecting the obvious consensus #1 player on everyone's board constitutes great GM work by Botterill. Any one of us on this board could have done that.

I'll continue to hope for miracles and I'll never root against my team (I was decided anti-tank back in the day).... but I honestly believe we'll finish dead last, or close to it, again this season. Happy Independence Day y'all!

 

"Blind"?

I think dudacek's summary is rather objective and reasonable, backed up by obvious facts.  If anyone could GM a hockey team, as you're implying, why are the Sabres still in the basement?  Why isn't the spread across the league measured in tenths or hundreds of a point, instead of whole points?

I think if anyone is blind, it's those who look at stuff and find fault with it, but never try to offer alternatives.  The-everything-is-just-wrong-because-it's-wrong crowd.

 

 

Edited July 5, 2018 by ...

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, ... said:

"Blind"?

I think dudacek's summary is rather objective and reasonable, backed up by obvious facts.  If anyone could GM a hockey team, as you're implying, why are the Sabres still in the basement?  Why isn't the spread across the league measured in tenths or hundreds of a point, instead of whole points?

I think if anyone is blind, it's those who look at stuff and find fault with it, but never try to offer alternatives.  The-everything-is-just-wrong-because-it's-wrong crowd

Ya - was gonna make the same observation. I feel like certain modifiers get attached to certain nouns without enough thought. "Blind optimism" being one. What dudacek wrote was optimistic - but it was far from blind.

[dudacek]

Other than the first sentence, I thought my post was decidedly neutral: Here were the team’s biggest issues, here’s what Botterill did to address them.

And I had no problem with @Iron Crotch‘s post. The roster sucked last year and “I don’t think Botterill has improved it in any way shape or form” is definitely an entirely defensible point of view.

Im on the fence as to whether those moves were the right ones, but I am happy to see our GM recognized what our needs were and was proactive in addressing them. I think the fact that has created more depth and competition for roster spots is hard to argue, but it remains to be seen if the chemistry shift is the right one, or if the new players are any good.

Edited July 5, 2018 by dudacek

[Drunkard]

The depth has improved at the cost of 2 of our best players (Kane and O'Reilly). It's one of the reasons I'm not a fan of the basket of lesser pieces approach.

FXGMJB made his 4 pieces requirement well known for Kane and his asking price for O'Reilly supposedly needed to mimic the Richard's trade. If he's hell bent on a basket of hopefuls and maybes that's his prerogative, but I don't have to like it.

I would have rather he made Kane available for the best prospect available from any of the interested teams. Maybe the results end up worse, but I would guess we would have been better off with that than Danny O'Regan plus whatever prospect that 1st in 2019 or 2020 ends up being.

Same for O'Reilly. Maybe Thomas or Kyrou is made available if Botterill doesn't insist on a 1st round pick being included or maybe not. It's not hard to imagine that we could have gotten a higher rated prospect than Thompson from one of the other interested teams if all the other pieces didn't have to be included though.

Trading a quarter for 4 nickles that you hope to turn into dimes or quarters sometimes pays off, but it's usually not that hard to obtain nickels in free agency or through lower level trades such as the way he picked up Sheary.

[dudacek]

I think Botterill is showing signs of being exactly what he was touted: an asset manager under the cap.

Kane for O’Regan and a conditional second looked pretty bad.

But Kane and a third for O’Regan, a first, Hunwick, Sheary and The Kane/Sheary contract difference looks a lot better. The Sheary move doesn’t happen if we sign Kane.

Edited July 5, 2018 by dudacek

[That Aud Smell]

^

Way to follow that bouncing ball, sir.

I'm not sure JBOT can get it done, but he's going about his business in a smart way, which I do appreciate.

[...]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Other than the first sentence, I thought my post was decidedly neutral: Here were the team’s biggest issues, here’s what Botterill did to address them.

And I had no problem with @Iron Crotch‘s post. The roster sucked last year and “I don’t think Botterill has improved it in any way shape or form” is definitely an entirely defensible point of view.

Im on the fence as to whether those moves were the right ones, but I am happy to see our GM recognized what our needs were and was proactive in addressing them. I think the fact that has created more depth and competition for roster spots is hard to argue, but it remains to be seen if the chemistry shift is the right one, or if the new players are any good.

Any point of view is defensible, it's just a matter of whether the POV is more chatter to add to the din of discontent or whether it is meaningful enough to stand out and warrant scrutiny.

Not to harp on Iron Crotch, or anyone, really, who is not happy with the moves JBot has made, but I'd like to know what these voices/authors think JBot should do otherwise?  I'm no fan of Schopp, but I can relate to his frustration with callers who throw out XYZ ideas without vetting those ideas first.  It's the constant swirl of negative energy that gets old, and with Pegulas I'm convinced they at first were sensitive to it, hence the reason for the ridiculous moves the organization made the first three years or so.

Someone made the point that exGMTM was an over-correction for exGMDR.  I can buy that narrative seeing how things turned out.  Murray wouldn't have made the moves JBot did, in my opinion.  Indeed, I think Murray was out of ideas on what to do.

Anyway, I think JBot has shown a little creativity and bravery so far.  The D should be improved, and way more deep than the last several seasons.  I think Kane would still be here if HE wanted to be here, and ROR would have been gone regardless.  But now that both are gone, JBot is ready to trust his younger forwards more to get it done.  That's brave, and outside the conventional wisdom you find in places like this and in the media.

 

 

[Drunkard]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think Botterill is showing signs of being exactly what he was touted: an asset manager under the cap.

Kane for O’Regan and a conditional second looked pretty bad.

But Kane and a third for O’Regan, a first, Hunwick, Sheary and The Kane/Sheary contract difference looks a lot better. The Sheary move doesn’t happen if we sign Kane.

I don't think that's true at all. Even with Kane we still had multiple holes filled by JAGs at LW. Half the board was pissing and moaning about the quality of Reinhart's wingers to start last season and that's while Kane was still on the roster. It's certainly possible that we would have made that trade even if we had re-signed Kane.

 

[Swedesessed]

26 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

^

Way to follow that bouncing ball, sir.

I'm not sure JBOT can get it done, but he's going about his business in a smart way, which I do appreciate.

 

I agree,

Really feel the sad tale for us Sabres fans if that we really needed this kind of GM before the first tank (For Sam). We didn't need a GM like GMTM to then sign players to bad contracts. If JBot was our GM for 4 years pre Eichel tank and then left, then a GM like Murray would have been more effective. Botterill will build this roster properly. Unfortunately, once again, we just have to be a little patient and our patience has worn thin.

[pi2000]

JBOTs like to stockpile prospects with the hope that he catches lighting in a bottle like he did with Guentzel. 

I'm generally OK with that philosophy, but it's going to be a while before it pays any dividends.   

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, pi2000 said:

JBOTs like to stockpile prospects with the hope that he catches lighting in a bottle like he did with Guentzel. 

I'm generally OK with that philosophy, but it's going to be a while before it pays any dividends.   

Interesting take. I do think that's essentially what he does -- try to achieve by quantity what FGMTM thought he could achieve by quality. It's not to say that there's no qualitative judgment going into what JBOT is doing, but generating some volume is clearly a priority.

[LGR4GM]

I will say I trust Botterill to properly try and develop players more than I did Murray. 

[Scottysabres]

23 minutes ago, Skurk Liger said:

I will say I trust Botterill to properly try and develop players more than I did Murray. 

It appears he's taking that route. The only question I have is how long before we start seeing results, because right now, this organization appears to be a mess.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Scottysabres said:

It appears he's taking that route. The only question I have is how long before we start seeing results, because right now, this organization appears to be a mess.

I would hope this year but those developing draft picks are probably at least another year if not 2 or 3 away from being impactful. 

[dudacek]

I posted a bit about the 06 Sabres in the development thread.

Miller, Gaustad, Pominville, Roy hadn’t made the NHL yet when that season started. Kotalik, Campbell, Tallinder were unproven roster filler. They were all between the ages of 22 and 26.

Age is something to consider when you look at development

23 Ristolainen, Bailey, Malone, Smith, Oglevie

22 Baptiste, Reinhart, Olofsson, Hickey, Pilut

21 Eichel, Borgen, Fitzgerald

20 Nylander, Thompson, Asplund, Pu, Guhle

19 Mittelstadt, Davidsson, Lukkonen

18 Dahlin, Samuelsson

 

[LGR4GM]

Outside of Ristolainen who has played a ton of NHL games already, I would expect every other player on that list to show some level of improvement. Now that doesn't mean they make the NHL but they should be at least a hair better then last year. 

[pi2000]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I would hope this year but those developing draft picks are probably at least another year if not 2 or 3 away from being impactful. 

I feel the same.    It's going to be a few more years before anybody currently in Roch/college/sweden becomes a positive contributor in BUF.

[dudacek]

13 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

I feel the same.    It's going to be a few more years before anybody currently in Roch/college/sweden becomes a positive contributor in BUF.

I guess it depends on how you define contributor, but I expect Dahlin and Ullmark to have significant roles in Buffalo this year, and Baptiste and Nelson to be playing here in depth roles.

I also would not be surprised to see Guhle, Bailey, and Thompson on the roster as well. Olofsson, Nylander, Pilut and Asplund are the mix as well, though I suspect we won’t see them until,the new year.

[Thorner]

Very much enjoyed this chart, regarding Botterill's off-season thus far:

 

 

[Thorner]

On 7/5/2018 at 11:39 AM, dudacek said:

I think Botterill is showing signs of being exactly what he was touted: an asset manager under the cap.

Kane for O’Regan and a conditional second looked pretty bad.

But Kane and a third for O’Regan, a first, Hunwick, Sheary and The Kane/Sheary contract difference looks a lot better. The Sheary move doesn’t happen if we sign Kane.

True, and it was only a 4th we sent over as well, albeit a conditional 4th. But if it does become a 3rd, it means we traded Hunwick for something.

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

I posted a bit about the 06 Sabres in the development thread.

Miller, Gaustad, Pominville, Roy hadn’t made the NHL yet when that season started. Kotalik, Campbell, Tallinder were unproven roster filler. They were all between the ages of 22 and 26.

Age is something to consider when you look at development

23 Ristolainen, Bailey, Malone, Smith, Oglevie

22 Baptiste, Reinhart, Olofsson, Hickey, Pilut

21 Eichel, Borgen, Fitzgerald

20 Nylander, Thompson, Asplund, Pu, Guhle

19 Mittelstadt, Davidsson, Lukkonen

18 Dahlin, Samuelsson

 

18-23, precisely the age group Botterill singled out. 

[JJFIVEOH]

On 7/5/2018 at 2:52 PM, pi2000 said:

JBOTs like to stockpile prospects with the hope that he catches lighting in a bottle like he did with Guentzel. 

I'm generally OK with that philosophy, but it's going to be a while before it pays any dividends.   

I'm happy with what he has done so far, but I'm sick and tired of waiting. It's getting really old.

[GASabresIUFAN]

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/jason-botterill-has-buffalo-on-the-right-track

interesting article from the Hockey News.  Jbot is really doing what we should have been doing in the first place.

Nice chart Thorny.  I also like the age list by Duda.  Between the two it puts a real perspective on Jbot’s plan.  Built depth in the organization, fill holes with value acquisitions until the depth is ready.  TM wasn’t patient enough for this approach. 

Edited July 7, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN

[dudacek]

On 7/4/2018 at 3:40 PM, Iron Crotch said:

I wish I could have the blind optimism that some of you do, but the roster as it stands is awful. Certainly there is some young talent, but that is almost entirely a function of a steady stream of top-10 picks courtesy of sucking so badly for the past 7/8 seasons. The team got 20 points worse under Botterill/Housley last season…. and we just ditched two 20+ goal scorers from the lowest scoring offense in the league. I don't see why putting together the worst team in the league, lucking into the first overall pick via the draft lottery, then selecting the obvious consensus #1 player on everyone's board constitutes great GM work by Botterill. Any one of us on this board could have done that.

I'll continue to hope for miracles and I'll never root against my team (I was decided anti-tank back in the day).... but I honestly believe we'll finish dead last, or close to it, again this season. Happy Independence Day y'all!

 

Not picking on @Iron Crotch because he certainly wasn’t alone in this opinion. I am scared to revisit the opening GDT because it wasn’t pretty.

Has Botterill won any of you over yet?

[Samson's Flow]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Not picking on @Iron Crotch because he certainly wasn’t alone in this opinion. I am scared to revisit the opening GDT because it wasn’t pretty.

Has Botterill won any of you over yet?

I think a lot of the posts in this thread from July have more to do with "show me the baby" than any sort of overwhelming negativity. It's hard to fully buy in when the results have been consistently bad until the team starts to demonstrate otherwise.

[pi2000]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Not picking on @Iron Crotch because he certainly wasn’t alone in this opinion. I am scared to revisit the opening GDT because it wasn’t pretty.

Has Botterill won any of you over yet?

Jury is still out.   

If we can't hold him accountable for 8 months of subpar hockey, we can't absolve him after 10 straight wins, 1st place in the NHL, tying a franchise record winning streak, having the leagues best record in 1 goal games, best home record, trading for the leagues top goal scorer, signing a starting goaltender in FA on the cheap, fixing the locker room culture, acquiring 2 extra 1st round picks, developing TT, etc.. etc..