Adams/Granato: In for the long haul

[bunomatic]

7 hours ago, grinreaper said:

It appears to me that you have the damned if you don't down pat. Also you're ready to take a bat to him while he (his team) is doing. In actuality I think the Pegulas learned a lot from how the Bills have put themselves in a position for long term success. Looks like they are trying to emulate them with the Sabres. 

Hopefully you’re right about his experience with the Bills rubbing off on him. Maybe he’s been humbled by the losing on the Sabres side. Who knows ? I like what KA is doing. Lets hope it pays off.

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, Taro T said:

There's 1 team you missed on that template front & that's Carolina - both the early '00's & this latest iteration.  Both got a pretty good core together but didn't have goaltending & then got reasonable/good goaltending and more or less came out of nowhere after stockpiling some talent.

Still lean towards Adams doesn't go after established goalies because this team isn't quite ready to make a true push for a championship, so he's willing to pick up another Savoie/Quinn type player next year

I've thought for a while that Adams is trying to be like Carolina in many ways. Carolina added some veteran players though and gambled on some others. It's not just youngsters growing together. 

The second sentence is definitely how he is thinking. That's the problem I have with it all though. Maybe KA sees this as year 3 and is willing to take his time. I see this as year 11 and want to win now. 

[Archie Lee]

6 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I've thought for a while that Adams is trying to be like Carolina in many ways. Carolina added some veteran players though and gambled on some others. It's not just youngsters growing together. 

The second sentence is definitely how he is thinking. That's the problem I have with it all though. Maybe KA sees this as year 3 and is willing to take his time. I see this as year 11 and want to win now. 

I would definitely say that he does not see this as year 11. If he is thinking in terms of years at all, then I think he may well see this as year 2. 

[Stoner]

Is there another fanbase in the NHL where this would be a topic?

Poorly worded. Among non-winning franchises of course. Even some of the successful ones...

What's crazier, having the discussion now or the very idea of 20 years of anyone?

[That Aud Smell]

On 7/16/2022 at 6:28 PM, SDS said:

FWIW, after an unprecedented stretch of stability with Regier/Ruff and then many years of turmoil, I think you’re looking at a 10 minimum, if not more, of these two. I would say 20, but I get the feeling that Granato might retire by then.

Even though they just kinda started, I have a sense these two will be in their jobs for as long as they want them.

14 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Is there another fanbase in the NHL where this would be a topic?

Poorly worded. Among non-winning franchises of course. Even some of the successful ones...

What's crazier, having the discussion now or the very idea of 20 years of anyone?

I'd lost the thread here, tbh, or maybe never had a handle on it. So I reposted the OP. 

It is an odd take.

Like the man said: Just win, baby.

 

[nfreeman]

17 hours ago, Taro T said:

There's 1 team you missed on that template front & that's Carolina - both the early '00's & this latest iteration.  Both got a pretty good core together but didn't have goaltending & then got reasonable/good goaltending and more or less came out of nowhere after stockpiling some talent.

Still lean towards Adams doesn't go after established goalies because this team isn't quite ready to make a true push for a championship, so he's willing to pick up another Savoie/Quinn type player next year if Comrie isn't ready to be the man & if he is good enough to shock the world then he's good with that too.  Last year showed that he has assembled a resilient group - they never turned on each other when things were bleak around January & they even bounced back and played good & entertaining hockey down the stretch.  Expect the mental side hasn't changed regardless of whether Comrie's up to the challenge & because of that we'll see a GM get a 4th year in the job for the 1st time since Regier did it at the turn of the century.

Really can't recall a time the team had as many well regarded prospects; had Regier not kept Rolston we'd've possibly seen it back around '15 but he still hadn't rebuilt the scouting department, so don't know if he'd've gotten the full bang for his buck.  (And, the comment about Rolston was that he was so out of his element that he got Regier canned with him; had Darcy hired a competent coach he might've survived the "suffering" but by not even looking for a competent coach he made the organization a laughing stock & paid the price with his career.)

Adams is definitely assembling a group of kids & letting them grow together.  Hopefully Levi's the real deal; if he is, these kids will become special.  But really hoping Comrie's special too, because Levi is still likely 2 years away.

1st bolded -- I don't think I agree here -- I think KA just determined that, of the pool of goalies who were obtainable and willing to come here this summer, there wasn't one who was a "sure thing" to be good enough to significantly improve the Sabres' chances -- i.e. they all, including Comrie, had more or less the same likelihood of being that good, so he took the one he liked the most, which was Comrie.  And I don't think KA will be OK with finishing 8th-last again.  If that happens, I think we'll see him move on from some of the guys on this year's roster.

2nd bolded -- this is interesting.  Since the Sabres were obviously tanking at that point, I haven't thought much about whether Darcy could've ridden out the storm if he'd have chosen a better coach.  I guess it kinda depends on whether the Sabres organizationally were committed to a full 2-year tank, which was needed to get Eichel, or whether they would've stopped tanking after drafting Reinhart if they'd shown signs of life under a better coach.  Even with a better coach the franchise might still have decided to tank that 2nd year to get Eichel though.

 

 

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I would definitely say that he does not see this as year 11. If he is thinking in terms of years at all, then I think he may well see this as year 2. 

Definitely, and that failure by the organization is a real thing imo. It kind of takes the fanbase for granted. Hence the reason I won't jump on the bandwagon again without actual results. It's been way way way too long. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

4 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Is there another fanbase in the NHL where this would be a topic?

Poorly worded. Among non-winning franchises of course. Even some of the successful ones...

What's crazier, having the discussion now or the very idea of 20 years of anyone?

Carolina about 4 years ago.

20 year of anyone ??  Is that how you are choosing to define 'long-haul' ??

Also, I can't remember if I sent congrats your way ... congrats on recently surpasing 40,000 posts.  You have obviously been here for the long-haul even with your extended break along the way.

EDIT TO ADD:

Sorry, my friend.  The OP mentioned a possiblitly of 20 years.  That's a long time and I don't see that happening, but I could see 10.  How long was the DR and LR show ??  About 15. I think.

Edited August 9, 2022 by Sabres Fan in NS
more goodly information ... and an apology

[Thorner]

23 hours ago, Taro T said:

Still lean towards Adams doesn't go after established goalies because this team isn't quite ready to make a true push for a championship,

 

5 hours ago, nfreeman said:

1st bolded -- I don't think I agree here -- I think KA just determined that, of the pool of goalies who were obtainable and willing to come here this summer, there wasn't one who was a "sure thing" to be good enough to significantly improve the Sabres' chances -- i.e. they all, including Comrie, had more or less the same likelihood of being that good, so he took the one he liked the most, which was Comrie.

I think it’s probably a bit of both? 

For me I think it comes down to altering the bolded above to “who were obtainable for a price the Sabres were willing to pay.” I do think there have been instances where Adams had the ability to pay more to upgrade on talent in net (see: Ullmark), where there WAS “better” available, obtainable, but the calculation for Adams, because the team in his mind wasn’t “there” yet, was to prioritize avoiding sacrificing anything of the future over a moderate upgrade for now. 

I don’t think the calculation was always just “no one is worth paying for”. Only that no one was worth it based on where we are in his plan’s timeframe measured/compared/contrasted against how big of a talent upgrade was actually on the table. 

- - - 

I think Adams goes big game hunting in the trade market for a goalie up to and including at the price of an overpay if he thinks the team is at the point it indisputably needs that fortification in net, if it becomes apparent we don’t have it - and I think that time frame coincides with Levi’s ETA

Edited August 9, 2022 by Thorny

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

 

I think it’s probably a bit of both? 

For me I think it comes down to altering the bolded above to “who were obtainable for a price the Sabres were willing to pay.” I do think there have been instances where Adams had the ability to pay more to upgrade on talent in net (see: Ullmark), where there WAS “better” available, obtainable, but the calculation for Adams, because the team in his mind wasn’t “there” yet, was to prioritize avoiding sacrificing anything of the future over a moderate upgrade for now. 

I don’t think the calculation was always just “no one is worth paying for”. Only that no one was worth it based on where we are in his plan’s timeframe measured/compared/contrasted against how big of a talent upgrade was actually on the table. 

- - - 

I think Adams goes big game hunting in the trade market for a goalie up to and including at the price of an overpay if he thinks the team is at the point it indisputably needs that fortification in net, if it becomes apparent we don’t have it - and I think that time frame coincides with Levi’s ETA

But who was obtainable at any price this summer who meets my criterion of being a "sure thing" to be good enough to significantly improve the Sabres' chances?  I don’t think a guy like Ullmark meets that standard.  

[dudacek]

55 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

But who was obtainable at any price this summer who meets my criterion of being a "sure thing" to be good enough to significantly improve the Sabres' chances?  I don’t think a guy like Ullmark meets that standard.  

Has there been an occasion where Adams has stepped up and taken a risk, or “overpaid” to get what he wanted, be it on a trade or a contract?

I don’t think he has.  So far, he seems to be about setting his price/value and sticking to it.

It will be interesting to see if that is strategy for the foundation-setting stage that will be modified when the team is a contender, like @Thorny suggests, or a general management principle he’s planning to stick with.

[nfreeman]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

Has there been an occasion where Adams has stepped up and taken a risk, or “overpaid” to get what he wanted, be it on a trade or a contract?

I don’t think he has.  So far, he seems to be about setting his price/value and sticking to it.

It will be interesting to see if that is strategy for the foundation-setting stage that will be modified when the team is a contender, like @Thorny suggests, or a general management principle he’s planning to stick with.

I agree that he hasn’t done so, and that a time will come when he’ll need to do so — I just think the choice to sign Comrie doesn’t indicate a reluctance to do so, as I think that choice was primarily driven by the absence of clearly substantially superior alternatives.  There were arguably slightly superior alternatives, but not at the difference-making level IMHO.  

[dudacek]

10 hours ago, nfreeman said:

I agree that he hasn’t done so, and that a time will come when he’ll need to do so — I just think the choice to sign Comrie doesn’t indicate a reluctance to do so, as I think that choice was primarily driven by the absence of clearly substantially superior alternatives.  There were arguably slightly superior alternatives, but not at the difference-making level IMHO.  

Agreed. We know he tried and failed with Murray. We have no idea what else was tried and failed, or was offered and rejected.

Comrie was the best choice - or at least the preferred choice - of what was available.

Edited August 10, 2022 by dudacek

[French Collection]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

Agreed. We know he tried and failed with Murray. We have no idea what else was tried and failed, or offered and rejected.

Comrie was the best choice - or at least the preferred choice - of what was available.

I would rather give Comrie a shot than try to revive Murray. Murray has had three lousy seasons and is paid too much, even though the Sabres have cap room. There is upside with Comrie that is starting to show, I want to see him take the net and provide some solid goaltending.