Huckleberry Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 1 minute ago, bob_sauve28 said: I can’t help thinking that Hutton giving that interview saying his eyes were bad last season was the reason JBott got canned. Think about it, would that be a secret you’d want getting out? Obviously the press didn’t know, but who else didn’t know? If the Pagulas learned about that from the Buffalo News last week, then I bet they were angry. Did Ralph Kruger know? They kept making the point yesterday that they wanted more communication. That fits the narrative here that they were not told our starting goaltender couldn’t follow the puck! If I were JBott I wouldn’t want the Pagulas knowing that either unless you were ready to find another goalie fast. Once the cat was out of the bag you would have been in an impossible situation with Hutton. Can’t trade him, other teams would know they have you in a bind and we look like a joke, which we do and that’s why Botts is out, IMO. I feel the same way that they just sacked everyone that knew about it and didn't act on it. But seems a stretch. other one might just be he was against the mass lay offs and wouldn't do it.
Randall Flagg Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, SDS said: What are you talking about? The Islanders went 23 years without making the playoffs. No one is setting the standard for ineptitude if they miss next year. Hyperbole doesn’t help the situation. No, that was their time without winning a series. We tie the drought record if we miss again. 4
SDS Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said: No, that was their time without winning a series. We tie the drought record if we miss again. Thanks. I looked it up, but I misread the information. 2
Gatorman0519 Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, SDS said: Thanks. I looked it up, but I misread the information. Some depressing facts eh?
Sabres Fan in NS Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 59 minutes ago, darksabre said: You guys ready for Darcy Regier Part II, "Do Something!" Boogaloo? I gave you a cup just for the boogaloo awesomeness. *the am, the fm, the pm too* ... 1
Randall Flagg Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 Apparently he mentioned how the Amerks success was largely driven by guys who would never be sabres. He's hitting talking points that I would have never mustered hope for getting talked about by people who matter. Excitement level slowly creeping up 6 1
bob_sauve28 Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 10 minutes ago, Huckleberry said: I feel the same way that they just sacked everyone that knew about it and didn't act on it. But seems a stretch. other one might just be he was against the mass lay offs and wouldn't do it. I think there were two separate issues here. The cost cutting was going to happen anyway, I mean the league has zero revenue coming in. The JBott thing isn’t about saving money, I think they are still paying him. I think firing JBott was just rolled into the cost cutting moves though they are separate issues.
darksabre Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said: Apparently he mentioned how the Amerks success was largely driven by guys who would never be sabres. He's hitting talking points that I would have never mustered hope for getting talked about by people who matter. Excitement level slowly creeping up Again, it's very weird that he's this well informed about the org from top to bottom.
WildCard Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said: Apparently he mentioned how the Amerks success was largely driven by guys who would never be sabres. He's hitting talking points that I would have never mustered hope for getting talked about by people who matter. Excitement level slowly creeping up I noticed that and was conflicted. On one hand, you do want to bring in vets and have a winning culture in the minors to help the young guys. On the other hand, Botts really did take it to the extreme. There was maybe 2-3? prospects on the Amerks that were ever going to be useful to the Sabres. The rest were there solely to make the Amerks better
darksabre Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 Just now, WildCard said: I noticed that and was conflicted. On one hand, you do want to bring in vets and have a winning culture in the minors to help the young guys. On the other hand, Botts really did take it to the extreme. There was maybe 2-3? prospects on the Amerks that were ever going to be useful to the Sabres. The rest were there solely to make the Amerks better The question is: were the Amerks good in a way that was benefiting the prospects, or were they good at a detriment to the prospects? If you've got prospects that you set development goals for, and they need to hit certain benchmarks to give you the info you need to evaluated their progress, and then those benchmarks aren't getting met because AHL vets are filling up too much space on the ice, yeah, there could be a problem there. Sounds like the feeling is that a balance wasn't being struck between player development and trying to just win games. That's an age-old struggle with AHL teams, especially in markets like Rochester where the fans really want their team to win every night. 1
Randall Flagg Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 4 minutes ago, WildCard said: I noticed that and was conflicted. On one hand, you do want to bring in vets and have a winning culture in the minors to help the young guys. On the other hand, Botts really did take it to the extreme. There was maybe 2-3? prospects on the Amerks that were ever going to be useful to the Sabres. The rest were there solely to make the Amerks better Right, having vets down there is important. Recognizing the folly of the argument that Jason and his supporters used r.e. rochester is also important 1
Sabre fan Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 yeah and many of Botts lovers tried to sell on on how great he had done in making Rochester better...anybody could sign a bunch of veterans and make that tram bette ras he did but as Wildcard said there are only a a few young guys that had any chance of making the NHL team...as for the big team Botts seemed to think that adding veterans there would help too (Frolik Simmons etc) I hate to say it but I would much rather just play the young guys and stick with them as the Leafs did til they learn to play in the NHL...it may take some time but at least they are young guys with years ahead of them
thewookie1 Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 I’m curious as to what Adams will be philosophically for his team building. His Amerks comment does make a lot of sense. We need Rochester to win due to youngsters being led by vets not youngsters just riding shotgun with lifelong AHLers. One good thing that may come from being slightly more frugal is a heavier investment into analytics as the bang for the buck is rather good.
Hawerchuk Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 17 hours ago, LabattBlue said: No. That is Kruegers buddy. Smith and his ***** PK are safe for now Yeah. No kidding the PK was atrocious! Good thing Pegulas kept him. Wouldn't want to have a good PK unit or anything! ?
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 Just listened to the entire interview His buzz words are "analytics" and "doing more with less." My other take away was the Taylor and his staff got the short end of the stick, but I agree that if they weren't coaching the same style as RK was preaching that is clearly a disconnect that needed to be fixed. Personally I think Taylor is going to be an NHL HC sooner then later. I think he did wonders with what he was given to work with.
dudacek Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 25 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said: Apparently he mentioned how the Amerks success was largely driven by guys who would never be sabres. He's hitting talking points that I would have never mustered hope for getting talked about by people who matter. Excitement level slowly creeping up Not for Inky, Ogre and other fans of the Amerks. 23 minutes ago, darksabre said: Again, it's very weird that he's this well informed about the org from top to bottom. Is it that weird? I mean I continue to agree with your initial observation, but he’s been working in the organization for a decade and he’s been a fan of the team for most of his life. 22 minutes ago, WildCard said: I noticed that and was conflicted. On one hand, you do want to bring in vets and have a winning culture in the minors to help the young guys. On the other hand, Botts really did take it to the extreme. There was maybe 2-3? prospects on the Amerks that were ever going to be useful to the Sabres. The rest were there solely to make the Amerks better It was not good for the Sabres that one of Bryson, Fitzpatrick or Hickey was regularly sitting for MacWilliam or Nelson.
Stoner Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 27 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said: Apparently he mentioned how the Amerks success was largely driven by guys who would never be sabres. He's hitting talking points that I would have never mustered hope for getting talked about by people who matter. Excitement level slowly creeping up May I curb your enthusiasm? Because that's what I specialize in. Hopefully it was just happy PR talk on the radio, but I cringed at Kevyn talking about growing up in the area and knowing the "DNA of the town." He recalled how the team used to be built to reflect the community. Blue collar, lunch bucket and all that. He said it after saying he wanted the Sabres to be hard to play against. Terry once said he likes hard-working, gritty players. Again, hopefully the notion that tens of thousands of men still trudge into Bethlehem Steel every day won't affect how Adams builds the team, because, as you know, it won't do one thing for those underlying offensive analytics you rightfully focus on. 1
darksabre Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 1 minute ago, dudacek said: Not for Inky, Ogre and other fans of the Amerks. Is it that weird? I mean I continue to agree with your initial observation, but he’s been working in the organization for a decade and he’s been a fan of the team for most of his life. It was not good for the Sabres that one of Bryson, Fitzpatrick or Hickey was regularly sitting for MacWilliam or Nelson. It's the details that are making my ears perk up. It just doesn't fit with what we have been told his "role" was with the team prior to this. It hints that he was far more involved in pretty much everything, which may dispel some of the notion that he doesn't have the experience to do this job. He still doesn't have much experience, but he sure seems to have a lot of information. 1
Randall Flagg Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 4 minutes ago, PASabreFan said: May I curb your enthusiasm? Because that's what I specialize in. Hopefully it was just happy PR talk on the radio, but I cringed at Kevyn talking about growing up in the area and knowing the "DNA of the town." He recalled how the team used to be built to reflect the community. Blue collar, lunch bucket and all that. He said it after saying he wanted the Sabres to be hard to play against. Terry once said he likes hard-working, gritty players. Again, hopefully the notion that tens of thousands of men still trudge into Bethlehem Steel every day won't affect how Adams builds the team, because, as you know, it won't do one thing for those underlying offensive analytics you rightfully focus on. Yeah I mean, I dont care for all of that other stuff either. But I've heard two of my own talking points this morning when I've heard zero total in the last 5 years lol. So I'm net-happy. Many months before its time to make the moves that'll determine any of this anyway, so I'll get more prepared to wince as it approaches
inkman Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 10 minutes ago, dudacek said: Not for Inky, Ogre and other fans of the Amerks. We've seen other broke ass owners try to implement the heavy prospect lineups. Some of the worst Amerks teams I've ever seen were using that philosophy. It doesn't work for development or for winning. 2
Randall Flagg Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 I do think we should emphasize that Kevyn isn't talking about gutting the Amerks of vets, it just seemed that he wasn't impressed by the accomplishments of first round sweep losses when they basically had nothing to do with sabre prospects 3
inkman Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 14 minutes ago, PASabreFan said: May I curb your enthusiasm? Because that's what I specialize in. Hopefully it was just happy PR talk on the radio, but I cringed at Kevyn talking about growing up in the area and knowing the "DNA of the town." He recalled how the team used to be built to reflect the community. Blue collar, lunch bucket and all that. He said it after saying he wanted the Sabres to be hard to play against. Terry once said he likes hard-working, gritty players. Again, hopefully the notion that tens of thousands of men still trudge into Bethlehem Steel every day won't affect how Adams builds the team, because, as you know, it won't do one thing for those underlying offensive analytics you rightfully focus on. Here is where the rub is. He's right about fans here wanting a tough team. More than tough, they want winning. So build a team that is both. Tough and good. They don't need to be mutually exclusive. 3
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 I'm not sure Taylor was exactly given a hole mess of good prospects to work with 17-18 - Their top prospects were Ullmark (now the Sabres starter), Guhle (AAAA player) and TM's failed forwards in Cornel, Bailey, Nylander, and Baptiste 18-19 - Their top prospects were VO (now in our top 6), Asplund (1st NA year), Pilut ( Jbot Int FA), Borgen, with holdovers Nylander, Guhle, Bailey and Cornel. Thompson was sent down late in the year and showed improvement. 19-20 - Their top prospects were Bryson, Mitts, Thompson, Pilut, Asplund, and maybe Brett Murray with Borgen still hanging around. Bryson and Mitts certainly improved under Taylor and his staff. Not exactly an overflow of great young talent. Last year was the 1st year that Taylor was really coaching Jbot acquired prospects (Bryson, Pilut, Mitts and Thompson) with the later two being reclamation projects that were bearing fruit.
Stoner Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 4 minutes ago, inkman said: We've seen other broke ass owners try to implement the heavy prospect lineups. Some of the worst Amerks teams I've ever seen were using that philosophy. It doesn't work for development or for winning. It's funny that Adams said Rochester needs to be about preparing players to come to Buffalo, then said something like, "Not that they did a bad job doing that." I think he was just trying to dance around the idea that it was nothing more than being told to fire everyone. 1
Pimlach Posted June 17, 2020 Report Posted June 17, 2020 50 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said: I can’t help thinking that Hutton giving that interview saying his eyes were bad last season was the reason JBott got canned. Think about it, would that be a secret you’d want getting out? Obviously the press didn’t know, but who else didn’t know? If the Pagulas learned about that from the Buffalo News last week, then I bet they were angry. Did Ralph Kruger know? They kept making the point yesterday that they wanted more communication. That fits the narrative here that they were not told our starting goaltender couldn’t follow the puck! If I were JBott I wouldn’t want the Pagulas knowing that either unless you were ready to find another goalie fast. Once the cat was out of the bag you would have been in an impossible situation with Hutton. Can’t trade him, other teams would know they have you in a bind and we look like a joke, which we do and that’s why Botts is out, IMO. The NHL is a league were players play hurt all the time. Injuries are concealed all the time. If Hutton played with "bad eyes", whatever that means, that would not surprise me. Hutton probably insisted he could play. The communication narrative is old. Terry keeps going back to it like it means something. All it means is that he was surprised and he could use that surprise as rationale for a firing. Hockey players play hurt and traditionally owners turn a blind eye (pun intended). Botts is out because he refuse to operate under the cuts. He refused to support the firings of Sexton, Greeley, Taylor and staff, Jankowski and staff, etc. If there was no pandemic, and the season just ended, Terry and Kim would be supporting JBOT in his 4th year. But there is a pandemic, and PSE is hurting, and the Sabres are not playing for a long time --so now is the time for serious cost cutting and another rebuild. Hutton's eyes, Eichel's comments, Pilut's departure --- all just a lot of extra drama. This is about preserving the "family lifestyle". 1
Recommended Posts