How much better would we be with ROR and Kane?

[jame]

22 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh look, a backhanded insult. Maybe I was going to bed at the time and it wasn't lazy at all. I can't say the same for your arguments because when you are caught you turn to insults. It is a pattern that has been repeated on here several times in the last week. Further you rarely defend your points with as much info as others. 

Your presumptuousness is a lazy attempt to gain an argumentative advantage without having to defend your own view. 

 

[jame]

21 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

 

 

So let's break this down because yes, you would have blamed Botterill regardless of what he did. 

First, if he had been waived mid season which was not originally what I thought you meant, you would have been in here now saying how bad Botterill was for forcing Ullmark up early and having Johnson as a backup. That would have been your argument. Botterill sucks because he waived his starting goalie and had to call up Ullmark who wasn't a guaranteed starter in the middle of the season. 

Second, if he waives Lehner mid season and he is claimed you would have been blaming Botterill for losing an asset for nothing, which you are basically doing now by saying they couldn't fix Lehner and now see what he is doing. Saying they could have gotten him right implies you are mad that they did not get him right and would equally be mad if they waived him and he was claimed. You don't know if he wouldn't have been claimed.  You don't know if he would have. You don't get to use a whataboutism every time someone pokes a gaping hole in your theory. This what if scenario is already falling apart because what if he gets claimed or not, is completely subjective. 

Third, they keep Lehner into the offseason and qualify him. That would mean he gets more money than that 4mil correct? Would they not have to add to his deal as an RFA? Okay, so they qualify him. You are now mad at Botterill because Lehner hasn't gotten his head right and he is wasting cap on a bad asset. Lehner would have come off a bad season and gotten paid, another strike for Botterill. Lehner then comes in and looks the same because why wouldn't he? The system in Buffalo is far more wide open then the bore fest that gets played on Long Island. 

Fourth, they pay Lehner and then in October when final cuts are made they waive him. He goes unclaimed and goes to Rochester. You then complain about Botterill wasting the cap on Lehner and what a bad deal it was and how he should not have qualified him. 

Fifth, they pay Lehner and waive him and he gets claimed, now Botterill is an idiot for not trading Lehner. See above. 

Sixth, they pay him and he stays and he's good... THE ONLY scenario that you can't criticize Botterill for and the least likely outcome by far considering Lehner got better after he was not signed and needed to go through that process to get his head straight AND he plays in a system that directly benefits the goalies. How do I know that? Greiss has a .927sv% let alone what Lehner has. So again, Lehner stays and is mediocre. You criticize Botterill for not getting rid of him. 

 

This is a no win scenario. If you are okay with him getting waived and claimed then why are you not okay with him not getting qualified? The answer is simple, you don't like Botterill and will twist anything he does into a negative to support your argument. 

First, you’re wrong again. Last year I wanted Ullmark up after it was clear that the Lehner/Johnson tandem was a disaster. Similarly I’ve called for Olofsson and Pilut to be in Buffalo since day 1. There is a difference between 20 year old professional rookies who I don’t think are ready (Tage, Mitts), and 23-24 year old professionals.

your attempts to “know me” are ridiculous fails

second, I answered this in my original response. I guess your argument is that I’m a liar.... it is interesting that you’ve made your entire argument about me, and not Botts. And to see you retreat to an argument that is essentially “you don’t know what would have happened” while simultaneously pretending to know what I would’ve thought is... let’s say, mildly entertaining. Re: claim... you failed to deal with the facts I presented. Objective facts. Name a 4 million dollar player who has been claimed off waivers mid season?

third, no. The first time you attempted to interject a fact, and you’re wrong (qualifying offer doesn’t require a raise). 

The rest of your points are irrelevant. The point was that one team was able to get Lehner right and put a playoff system in place around him.

The winning scenario was putting Lehner on waivers to try to help get him right... it was the only winning scenario. If he got claimed (which there is literally zero evidence or logic to believe he would), then organizationally we are in no different place than we are today. If he didn’t get claimed, and it didn’t generate a wake up call, then we are in no different place than today. But if it did generate the wake up call, we could be in a different place.

the fact that you put so much effort into making this about me, is evidence that being a fair judge of Botts is not something you are willing to be.

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, jame said:

First, you’re wrong again. Last year I wanted Ullmark up after it was clear that the Lehner/Johnson tandem was a disaster. Similarly I’ve called for Olofsson and Pilut to be in Buffalo since day 1. There is a difference between 20 year old professional rookies who I don’t think are ready (Tage, Mitts), and 23-24 year old professionals.

your attempts to “know me” are ridiculous fails

second, I answered this in my original response. I guess your argument is that I’m a liar.... it is interesting that you’ve made your entire argument about me, and not Botts. And to see you retreat to an argument that is essentially “you don’t know what would have happened” while simultaneously pretending to know what I would’ve thought is... let’s say, mildly entertaining. Re: claim... you failed to deal with the facts I presented. Objective facts. Name a 4 million dollar player who has been claimed off waivers mid season?

third, no. The first time you attempted to interject a fact, and you’re wrong (qualifying offer doesn’t require a raise). 

The rest of your points are irrelevant. The point was that one team was able to get Lehner right and put a playoff system in place around him.

The winning scenario was putting Lehner on waivers to try to help get him right... it was the only winning scenario. If he got claimed (which there is literally zero evidence or logic to believe he would), then organizationally we are in no different place than we are today. If he didn’t get claimed, and it didn’t generate a wake up call, then we are in no different place than today. But if it did generate the wake up call, we could be in a different place.

the fact that you put so much effort into making this about me, is evidence that being a fair judge of Botts is not something you are willing to be.

I've made my argument about you because you're crusade is what I am arguing about. 

Your entire argument about Botterill doing wrong is that he didn't waive Lehner mid season. He still got rid of him and considering by mid season the season was over, why does it matter? The point was 1 team got Lehner right, okay fine. If that is the point why are you mad at Botterill? He was never going to install the low event system that the NYI have and therefore Lehner was never going to be good here. Botterill therefore did not qualify him and let him go. Explain to me what Botterill did wrong then. 

You are right on the qualifying offer. He makes over 1million so he would have had to be qualified at 100% of his current salary from my understanding of the CBA. 

As to the bolded, pot meet kettle. I've criticized Botterill plenty.

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

On 2/12/2019 at 10:48 PM, LGR4GM said:

I'm gonna respond tomorrow because I'm on my phone but if we had waived Lehner mid season you most certainly would have been mad at botterill. I'll give my full response tomorrow but you're proving my point. This was a kobayashi maru for botterill in your eyes. 

 

On 2/12/2019 at 10:50 PM, jame said:

I don’t know why you think that... maybe because it’s a lazy way to debate.

 

 

3 hours ago, jame said:

Your presumptuousness is a lazy attempt to gain an argumentative advantage without having to defend your own view. 

 

Here is the full exchange so people can see that you are overly condescending when calling people out. It has become a pattern with you in the month you have posted here. 

I tell you I will respond in full tomorrow because I am on my phone, note it was almost 11pm too. Then you respond with I am lazy and follow it up with another comment 2 days later calling me lazy again. Your tone on here is absolutely terrible. I am starting to think I should block you. 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, jame said:

Re: claim... you failed to deal with the facts I presented. Objective facts. Name a 4 million dollar player who has been claimed off waivers mid season?

 

Again, why does it matter if he were waived last year or let go this summer? Why does it matter? Why is it a failing for Botterill to allow Ullmark a full year in Rochester as opposed to tossing him into the mess that was Buffalo last year? And before you say something about it was Botterill's fault for the mess, we are focusing solely on this 1 issue right now. Why was Botterill's handling of Lehner last year wrong? 

Also saying that waiving him would have gotten his head straight is pure conjecture and as you say, we need to deal with facts. 

What facts do you believe I have ignored. 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, jame said:

mildly entertaining. Re: claim... you failed to deal with the facts I presented. Objective facts. Name a 4 million dollar player who has been claimed off waivers mid season?

Anti Niemi, 2017/18 season (last year) claimed November 14th by Montreal. Salary, 4.5million. I even found a goalie. 

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[nfreeman]

Ooooooooooohhhh.  Huge point for Liger.

[LGR4GM]

I am more than happy to debate the failures or issues with Botterill. ROR trade, Housley, the roster last year overall but not waiving Lehner is just not the hill to die on here. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

9 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I am more than happy to debate the failures or issues with Botterill. ROR trade, Housley, the roster last year overall but not waiving Lehner is just not the hill to die on here. 

Agreed.  Isn’t this a results business?  So Lehner, Kane and ROR are gone.  Jbot got rid of most of TM’s acquisitions and the team is better.  We are debating what tweaks Jbot needs to do in his second season to get us into the playoffs.  Did we ever even contend for a playoff position under TM despite his big time deals?  

TM’s best team went 35-36-11 for 81 pts.  That’s 35 wins and 47 loses, and people are complaining that we got rid of the anchors of that team.  Really?

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[jame]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

Here is the full exchange so people can see that you are overly condescending when calling people out. It has become a pattern with you in the month you have posted here. 

I tell you I will respond in full tomorrow because I am on my phone, note it was almost 11pm too. Then you respond with I am lazy and follow it up with another comment 2 days later calling me lazy again. Your tone on here is absolutely terrible. I am starting to think I should block you. 

You chose to play the “I know what you would say” card... that’s on you. And that type of lazy attack method is more offensive than pointing out it’s laziness. 

Nice job quoting the entire exchange and leaving out the 2nd time you arrogantly presumed and ascribed an opinion on me.

 Why did you feel the need to relitigate this? Feeling guilt?

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I am more than happy to debate the failures or issues with Botterill. ROR trade, Housley, the roster last year overall but not waiving Lehner is just not the hill to die on here. 

No one is dying in a hill.

Edited February 14, 2019 by jame

[nfreeman]

OK boys.  Let's take it down a notch here.

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Agreed.  Isn’t this a results business?  So Lehner, Kane and ROR are gone.  Jbot got rid of most of TM’s acquisitions and the team is better.  We are debating what tweaks Jbot needs to do in his second season to get us into the playoffs.  Did we ever even contend for a playoff position under TM despite his big time deals?  

TM’s best team went 35-36-11 for 81 pts.  That’s 35 wins and 47 loses, and people are complaining that we got rid of the anchors of that team.  Really? 

I don't think anyone is saying that TM was a better GM than JB. 

It's fair to evaluate JB and his moves, including the ROR and Kane decisions (and the execution of those decisions) without reference to TM.  It's also reasonable to think that JB has been a better GM than TM was but still has made mistakes -- some serious and consequential -- and overall hasn't performed as well as one might like.  (NB that I don't think this, but I don't think it's an opinion from outer space.)

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

But they essentially are.  Keeping ROR, Kane and Lehner is saying that TM’s core had this team going in the right direction despite that core capping out at 35 wins. 

If we kept ROR, Kane and Lehner, we’d have to remove 18.5 mill from our current cap.  So that means no Skinner, no Sheary, no Hutton, no Thompson, no Sobotka, no Hunwick.  That’s eliminating 6 players to keep 3.  Now we have to find 3 bargain basement players to complete the team such as Remi Elie with the few $ remaining under the cap.  That also means that our current 4th line becomes our third line. 

Also remember that without those two star forwards our offense has actually improved from about 2.4 goals for per game to nearly 3.  

Also keeping those 3 players, who are at the peak of their primes now gives us a much shorter window for success then we have now, as Kane will be 33 and ROR 32 when their deals expire.  How many KO contracts do we need? Also Skinner is a much better fit with Jack then Kane ever was.  

I have been asking for a 2nd line center for months, but keeping Kane, ROR and Lehner would have doomed this team to continued failure.  

Edited February 14, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, jame said:

You chose to play the “I know what you would say” card... that’s on you. And that type of lazy attack method is more offensive than pointing out it’s laziness. 

Nice job quoting the entire exchange and leaving out the 2nd time you arrogantly presumed and ascribed an opinion on me.

 Why did you feel the need to relitigate this? Feeling guilt?

No one is dying in a hill.

Honestly I don't feel guilt, I feel like I've been gaslighted. You still haven't responded to what your issue is about how Lehner was handled. 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

How about this, let's restart from the beginning. I'll not assume your thoughts and we'll see where the conversation goes. This will help move us forward. 

 

Why was it a bad move by Botterill to let Lehner go this summer?

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

How about this, let's restart from the beginning. I'll not assume your thoughts and we'll see where the conversation goes. This will help move us forward. 

 

Why was it a bad move by Botterill to let Lehner go this summer?

Yes, he should have gotten rid of him sooner.

[spndnchz]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

OK boys.  Let's take it down a notch here.

Noooo! This is good stuff!

[jame]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Honestly I don't feel guilt, I feel like I've been gaslighted. You still haven't responded to what your issue is about how Lehner was handled. 

Lehner, like numerous other players in the Botts era wasn’t held accountable. 

Lehner should’ve been on waivers... it don’t care if he would’ve been claimed (he wouldn’t have). 

The hindsight is that clearly a “wake up call” is what Lehner needed. So it turns out that what would’ve been best for the team, would’ve also been what was best for Lehner and could’ve produced a different outcome other than flushing an asset down the toilet.

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, jame said:

Lehner, like numerous other players in the Botts era wasn’t held accountable. 

Lehner should’ve been on waivers... it don’t care if he would’ve been claimed (he wouldn’t have). 

The hindsight is that clearly a “wake up call” is what Lehner needed. So it turns out that what would’ve been best for the team, would’ve also been what was best for Lehner and could’ve produced a different outcome other than flushing an asset down the toilet.

Ok,  I disagree. I think there was a chance of getting claimed. I think he would have just gotten a worse attitude by going to Rochester. I think he needed a fully fresh start somewhere 100% new. I think his sv% is partially him getting his head straight and the system he plays in.  I don't think using him last season to the end was a mistake because of how early the season torpedoed. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Mod fight.

Quick get the popcorn.

[GASabresIUFAN]

He would have been a low risk claim. A former high draft pick,  who is still young, who had played some good hockey and was an RFA with us already paying most of his salary last season.  

From the claiming teams point of view they get him for nearly nothing and if it doesn’t work out they don’t re-sign him. With so many teams needing goaltending someone would have claimed him.  

Had Jbot waived him it would have left us with Chad Johnson as the starting goalie.  He wouldn’t have recalled Ullmark because he wanted him anchoring the Amerks playoff team.  That means he would have had to claim someone else's reject or wasted an asset trading for someone else to serve as the backup.

Jbot did the right thing by keeping him for the season and then letting him walk.

Edited February 14, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[erickompositör72]

46 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He would have been a low risk claim. A former high draft pick,  who is still young, who had played some good hockey and was an RFA with us already paying most of his salary last season.  

From the claiming teams point of view they get him for nearly nothing and if it doesn’t work out they don’t re-sign him. With so many teams needing goaltending someone would have claimed him.  

Had Jbot waived him it would have left us with Chad Johnson as the starting goalie.  He wouldn’t have recalled Ullmark because he wanted him anchoring the Amerks playoff team.  That means he would have had to claim someone else's reject or wasted an asset trading for someone else to serve as the backup.

Jbot did the right thing by keeping him for the season and then letting him walk.

If I remember correctly, some analysts were even pointing to Lehner as a trade target for certain teams needing goaltending (they probably attributed Lehner's weak play to the team in front of him). While I don't think any scout with goaltending sensibilities would have endorsed such a trade, the risk factor is far less when making a waiver claim vs trading assets.