What is this team is missing to compete consistently?

[GASabresIUFAN]

39 minutes ago, JohnC said:

KA only brought in Lyubushkin to bolster the blue line. He had a strategy of going with the young defenders and allowing them to play significant minutes. There was nothing secret about his intentions about how he was going to build the roster and grow with them. That's exactly the same formula he is taking with the rest of the roster, the forward lines filled with young players. It's unlikely, at least for the first half of the season, that he is going to resort to bringing in marginal veteran players to take the place of the youngsters. 

There is no question that this team lacks depth. But that shouldn't be a surprise for any roster that is being rebuilt. That's an inevitable characteristic of any team going through this process i.e. the roster is incomplete and thin to begin with. KA and DG have been open and explicit about their strategy to rework this roster. Developing players is at the heart of it. It certainly can at times be an excruciating and exasperating to witness. 

I understand your frustration and impatience with this front office. But the course of action has been set and it is being followed. If you look at this team's record it is about where it should be. As @Taro Tand some others have astutely pointed out the Sabres have played a number of top tier teams. For the most part, although the outcomes have been disappointing, this team has not been outclassed. You need to be more patient. 

I’ve been patient for 50 years.  He has his core D in Power, Dahlin and Samuelsson.  Bryson is not a core player and either is Jokiharju.  However I’m not even asking for him to replace them.  All I’m asking for is to bring in veteran depth behind them if (when) they falter or we have injuries. As I said in the off-season Fitz (age 25) and Pilut (age 27) aren’t NHL players and they aren’t developing prospects.  The only reason they are here is that they were cheap and already in the organization.  They should be in Rochester helping there.  We need vets in the depth spots who can mentor the young D group and give us capable minutes when called upon.  

I honestly don’t understand why KA is so afraid to make a move that truly bolsters his roster.  Development is great but at some point you have to turn the switch from development to competing for a playoff spot.  The offense is there now.  Why waste another season when we have to resources to make the situation better and not block a single prospect on defense or in goal because we don’t have a single near ready prospect in either of these areas? (Johnson is likely to sign elsewhere, UPL is a bust, and Levi is still years away). 

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

I honestly don’t understand why KA is so afraid to make a move that truly bolsters his roster.  Development is great but at some point you have to turn the switch from development to competing for a playoff spot.  The offense is there now.  Why waste another season when we have to resources to make the situation better and not block a single prospect on defense or in goal because we don’t have a single near ready prospect in either of these areas? (Johnson is likely to sign elsewhere, UPL is a bust, and Levi is still years away). 

 

I'll just reply to the end of your response. Why do you think that Johnson is likely to sign elsewhere? Considering the thinness of our blue line group he would be a player who can rather quickly earn a roster spot. Even for Portillo, who I think will join another organization, he would be in a good situation here to earn a NHL roster spot sooner rather than later, even with Levi in the prospect pool. I'm starting to accept the fact that UPL will fall by the wayside. Although his failure isn't necessarily a definite development, it is a more likely development. 

[French Collection]

30 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'll just reply to the end of your response. Why do you think that Johnson is likely to sign elsewhere? Considering the thinness of our blue line group he would be a player who can rather quickly earn a roster spot. Even for Portillo, who I think will join another organization, he would be in a good situation here to earn a NHL roster spot sooner rather than later, even with Levi in the prospect pool. I'm starting to accept the fact that UPL will fall by the wayside. Although his failure isn't necessarily a definite development, it is a more likely development. 

It seems the LHD/RHD lines have been blurred due to necessity this year. Dahlin, Power, Mule and Bryson have played on their off side. Johnson would provide depth and perhaps he can play his off side as well. He can probably become one of the 6 and maybe be top 4 if he reaches his ceiling. I still want to see him sign with the Sabres.

Portillo and Levi could be the combo of the future. More teams are relying on tandems vs a full time #1. Portillo hopefully sees an opportunity in Buffalo and will sign.

They aren’t gone until they are.

[GASabresIUFAN]

44 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'll just reply to the end of your response. Why do you think that Johnson is likely to sign elsewhere? Considering the thinness of our blue line group he would be a player who can rather quickly earn a roster spot. Even for Portillo, who I think will join another organization, he would be in a good situation here to earn a NHL roster spot sooner rather than later, even with Levi in the prospect pool. I'm starting to accept the fact that UPL will fall by the wayside. Although his failure isn't necessarily a definite development, it is a more likely development. 

Why do I think Johnson won’t sign?  His father works for the Ducks, he’s a California kid and most importantly he gets to choose his destiny as soon as the college season ends.  Yes the Sabres have shown there is an opportunity here, but from his standpoint why go to Buffalo when he can choose from all 32 teams and choose a equal or better opportunity closer to home.   That isn’t to say he won’t sign here, but I think it’s unlikely at this point.  Even if he did sign, like Levi, he is facing at least one year in the A before he even has a chance of seeing ice time in Buffalo.  We can’t ask a rookie to solve our depth issues anyway. 

 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why do I think Johnson won’t sign?  His father works for the Ducks, he’s a California kid and most importantly he gets to choose his destiny as soon as the college season ends.  Yes the Sabres have shown there is an opportunity here, but from his standpoint why go to Buffalo when he can choose from all 32 teams and choose a equal or better opportunity closer to home.   That isn’t to say he won’t sign here, but I think it’s unlikely at this point.  Even if he did sign, like Levi, he is facing at least one year in the A before he even has a chance of seeing ice time in Buffalo.  We can’t ask a rookie to solve our depth issues anyway. 

 

All reasonable points.

But there are 4 counters to that:

1.  He has been working w/ the Sabres development staff for 3 years and has a familiarity and comfort level w/ Buffalo.  And based on this, he claims to like the Sabres organization (though obviously not enough to sign this past summer).  

2.  Maybe being in daddy's shadow isn't where he wants to be.  He presumably could've gone to Denver or other places closer to SoCal to play college hockey but chose Minny instead.  Fitzgerald didn't bolt for the Devils & daddy nor the B's & home.  It's not a given that the Ducks are his dream scenario.

3.  Maybe he has faith in his own abilities and expects he'd be a key piece in Buffalo & likes the idea of growing with the rest of the Sabres core.  

4.  Saved the biggest 1 for last.  Only the Sabres (or a team they trade his rights to) can let him burn a year of his ELC this year.  Depending upon when Minny's season ends, he MIGHT be able to earn a year of service towards FA as well.  Those are pretty big items in the plus column for going B&G instead of orange & whatever they're running w/ that particular night.

[Thorner]

If I said I had even a good theory, after theorizing to no avail for a decade +, it would be hubris. 

Who facking knows at this point.

- - - 

The fact there's such a spotlight now on the franchise, such a hot spotlight, might make it hard enough as it is. Beyond all the usual difficult-to-navigate mechanisms that go into team building, that are clearly hard enough, the simple overcoming of a earth-wide narrative that, like or not, surrounds the team, undoubtedly enters into the minds of those running / participating in the franchise, adds, maybe, an unmeasurable layer of difficulty. 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Thorny

[Thorner]

On 11/14/2022 at 1:28 PM, Porous Five Hole said:

If all these guys were Tage’s age (25) and we are still bad, then I would be concerned. But the team went youth movement/draft and develop. 
 

Tuch, Skinner, VO and other complementary pieces aren’t enough to be a playoff team today. It is what it is.   

 

 

On 11/14/2022 at 1:30 PM, GASabresIUFAN said:

The waiting for Levi strategy doesn't work for me either.  What is the best case scenario?  He signs this off-season, goes to the AHL next year dominates and earns a late season recall.  The maybe he shares the NHL next in 2024/25.  That's the best case.  What happens if he proves he needs 2 or 3 AHL seasons to get ready?  What then?  

UPL's continued poor AHL numbers tell me he is not an NHL goalie.  He is being outplayed again by Houser.  

KA need to move on from Anderson after this season and get a veteran in with some tread left on the tire.  He needs a minimum of another 2 year bridge guy.

Touch on a very interesting point here about waiting for Levi, especially in combined with the listing of the bolded players above. People aren't going to want to hear this,  but Tage is in his statistical prime..right now. Right right now. I'm not saying he's going to evaporate at 30, but we are talking a context of contending playoff team here, right? By the time Levi is ready, Thompson will very likely not be in his prime anymore. He's our best player, right? That..could be an issue. 

How is Skinner going to look in 3 years when Levi is ready for prime time? Tuch? 

Hearing Tuch is merely a "complimentary" piece is a little disconcerting. Why? The context he was mentioned under was that he's filling the role of a necessary complimentary piece towards making the playoffs. That we need better (not saying I think we need a better complimentary piece than Tuch, myself). But my point here: if we finding ourselves in the position of needing to bring in that player, the means through which we achieved Tuch gives quite a lot of pause: how many franchise C's do we have to trade? 

I have a lot of faith in our young players. But I do preach caution towards the "waiting for 2-3 years down the road" timeline. We may find ourselves in a spot where we are lacking veteran component, and then what, is it the next wave of prospects we are waiting for, to complement the ascended? Could be, but if Thompson and Tuch aren't the centerpieces of that roster anymore, dunno how many years we are talking at this point. 

Adams can make moves to adjust the complimentary pieces. It could all go really well - but, if we are talking 2-3 years down the road, we definitely, definitely will be needing, likely, plenty of the team building moves we haven't had a chance to see yet, from Adams, as he has so far been more content with the building from within strategy. Makes sense. But until we see how he manages the step of moulding a team that, hopefully, becomes good into a GREAT team, we really have no solitary idea what kind of ceiling we have a shot at achieving here, with this team behind the helm. 

 

 

[grinreaper]

8 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I’ve been patient for 50 years.  He has his core D in Power, Dahlin and Samuelsson.  Bryson is not a core player and either is Jokiharju.  However I’m not even asking for him to replace them.  All I’m asking for is to bring in veteran depth behind them if (when) they falter or we have injuries. As I said in the off-season Fitz (age 25) and Pilut (age 27) aren’t NHL players and they aren’t developing prospects.  The only reason they are here is that they were cheap and already in the organization.  They should be in Rochester helping there.  We need vets in the depth spots who can mentor the young D group and give us capable minutes when called upon.  

I honestly don’t understand why KA is so afraid to make a move that truly bolsters his roster.  Development is great but at some point you have to turn the switch from development to competing for a playoff spot.  The offense is there now.  Why waste another season when we have to resources to make the situation better and not block a single prospect on defense or in goal because we don’t have a single near ready prospect in either of these areas? (Johnson is likely to sign elsewhere, UPL is a bust, and Levi is still years away). 

 

I remember when Ryan Miller first came up to the Sabres and didn't perform very well. Seems like he was in tears after a game. Anyway, goalies are often something unlike humans and a special breed. They often need extra time to show their true worth while some are ready to perform at a young age. Show me a GM who knows the answer as far as goalies go and I'll show you a GM that has made a deal with the devil. 

[grinreaper]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

Touch on a very interesting point here about waiting for Levi, especially in combined with the listing of the bolded players above. People aren't going to want to hear this,  but Tage is in his statistical prime..right now. Right right now. I'm not saying he's going to evaporate at 30, but we are talking a context of contending playoff team here, right? By the time Levi is ready, Thompson will very likely not be in his prime anymore. He's our best player, right? That..could be an issue. 

How is Skinner going to look in 3 years when Levi is ready for prime time? Tuch? 

Hearing Tuch is merely a "complimentary" piece is a little disconcerting. Why? The context he was mentioned under was that he's filling the role of a necessary complimentary piece towards making the playoffs. That we need better (not saying I think we need a better complimentary piece than Tuch, myself). But my point here: if we finding ourselves in the position of needing to bring in that player, the means through which we achieved Tuch gives quite a lot of pause: how many franchise C's do we have to trade? 

I have a lot of faith in our young players. But I do preach caution towards the "waiting for 2-3 years down the road" timeline. We may find ourselves in a spot where we are lacking veteran component, and then what, is it the next wave of prospects we are waiting for, to complement the ascended? Could be, but if Thompson and Tuch aren't the centerpieces of that roster anymore, dunno how many years we are talking at this point. 

Adams can make moves to adjust the complimentary pieces. It could all go really well - but, if we are talking 2-3 years down the road, we definitely, definitely will be needing, likely, plenty of the team building moves we haven't had a chance to see yet, from Adams, as he has so far been more content with the building from within strategy. Makes sense. But until we see how he manages the step of moulding a team that, hopefully, becomes good into a GREAT team, we really have no solitary idea what kind of ceiling we have a shot at achieving here, with this team behind the helm. 

 

 

In most people's minds Tage was pretty much JAG until last season. He may very well be a little bit of a late bloomer but a bloomer he definitely is. I always thought that prime hockey age was usually about 27-to early 30's. Some players still excel into their late 30's. Regardless, with his size and reach along with what looks like a damn good hockey sense he very well might be one of those players who can adapt and change his game to suit his talents as he ages.  

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, grinreaper said:

In most people's minds Tage was pretty much JAG until last season. He may very well be a little bit of a late bloomer but a bloomer he definitely is. I always thought that prime hockey age was usually about 27-to early 30's. Some players still excel into their late 30's. Regardless, with his size and reach along with what looks like a damn good hockey sense he very well might be one of those players who can adapt and change his game to suit his talents as he ages.  

I believe in today's NHL the statistical prime is roughly ages 22-26. @Brawndoor @LGR4GM who're better than me at that kind of stuff can update if they like, but last I looked it was a little younger than one might think. That's just an average though - like you point out, everyone has their own curve. 

I'm not really making a statement that Thompson won't be as good at 29/30, merely that it's only a few years away, it would technically buck a statistical trend, and that the thing to keep in mind here is the context that he's our 1C. On a team, in 3 years, where the expectations are presumably *winning* while in the playoffs, right? We know we will need a very good 1C for that. Again, not saying Tage won't be that. Not all all. Merely saying that the idea he may not be producing like he is now is not a Thorny concern - it's a very valid potential likelihood. It's certainly not lost on me at all that even having a player who *might* be that for us, with Thompson is a very positive development. Leads me to wanting to sacrifice as little of this awesome-thompson-production as possible. 

My only point in saying this, is to point out we have a few players who are in this realm, where we don't exactly know where they'll be in 3 years. Some of the talk often seems to give off the vive (should be "vibe", maybe, Vaive?) that, "well, hold on now, we've got our top line in Skinner-Thompson-Tuch, just wait for the prospects to come along, THEN we will be great."

GREAT being the functional word, there. I'm leaving aside the prospects thing, granting that they indeed WILL be what we need, for the sake of argument. But that still leaves the guys who ARE producing now - it's not just Thompson who we *might*be seeing close to their best from, already. What I am pointing out is that the chances ALL of these guys maintain form, for when all these prospects join up (surely seamlessly, right?) is very unlikely. 

That simply means that Adams IS going to have have to get into a bit of roster construction and team building beyond that thing a computer can do, ya know, draft and develop (this is a joke, draft nuts don't get mad). And my only point in pointing out that Adams is assuredly going to have to get into some serious team building down the line, is that where it all ends up can only be unknown. 

Again, I think we will be a good team one day, but I'd actually argue we objectively cannot know beyond that. Way way too early. 

TLDR - see @Curt's post.

But, yes, it's not simply as easy as "waiting" for Levi. There *are* in fact merits to pushing for more wins sooner than later. I also witnessed this first hand with the Jets, who thought it was all on the horizon, until, suddenly, it was on the back burner. No, I do not think they are for real this year. 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Thorny

[grinreaper]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I believe in today's NHL the statistical prime is roughly ages 22-26. @Brawndoor @LGR4GMor someone more up on that stuff can update if they like, but last I looked it was a little younger than one might think. That's just an average though - like you point out, everyone has their own curve. 

I'm not really making a statement that Thompson won't be good at 29/30, merely that it's only a few years away, it would technically buck a statistical trend, and that the thing to keep in mind here is the context that he's our 1C. On a team, in 3 years, where the expectations are presumably *winning* while in the playoffs, right? We know we will need a very good 1C for that. Again, not saying Tage won't be that. Not all all. Merely saying that the idea he may not be producing like he is now is not a Thorny concern - it's a very valid potential likelihood.

My only point in saying this, is to point out we have a few players who are in this realm, where we don't exactly know where they'll be in 3 years. Some of the talk often seems to give off the vive (should be "vibe", maybe, Vaive?) that, "well, hold on now, we've got our top line in Skinner-Thompson-Tuch, just wait for the prospects to come along, THEN we will be great."

GREAT being the functional word, there. I'm leaving aside the prospects thing, granting that they indeed WILL be what we need, for the sake of argument. But that still leaves the guys who ARE producing now - it's not just Thompson who we *might*be seeing close to their best from, already. What I am pointing out is that the chances ALL of these guys maintain form, for when all these prospects join up (surely seamlessly, right?) is very unlikely. 

That simply means that Adams IS going to have have to get into a bit of roster construction and team building beyond that thing a computer can do, ya know, draft and develop (this is a joke, draft nuts don't get mad). And my only point in pointing out that Adams is assuredly going to have to get into some serious team building down the line, is that where it all ends up can only be unknown. 

Again, I think we will be a good team one day, but I'd actually argue we objectively cannot know beyond that. Way way too early. 

TLDR - see @Curt's post.

But, yes, it's not simply as easy as "waiting" for Levi. There *are* in fact merits to pushing for more wins sooner than later. I also witnessed this first hand with the Jets, who thought it was all on the horizon, until, suddenly, it was on the back burner. No, I do not think they are for real this year. 

Thanks for your thoughtful response. From my view we have more prospects that have a chance to be good to really good players than we can absorb without making some trades. Whether it's trades of a prospect or more or trades of current Sabres players who knows? I'm thinking Adams has put us on a course to having many options and a plethora of skilled players. With some tweaks we have the possibility to have a defense corps along the lines of the recent Nashville Predators. Our forwards that we have in the NHL and prospects gaining experience most likely will push out some of our older players and make us a contender. That's my optimistic view. 

[Thorner]

30 minutes ago, grinreaper said:

Thanks for your thoughtful response. From my view we have more prospects that have a chance to be good to really good players than we can absorb without making some trades. Whether it's trades of a prospect or more or trades of current Sabres players who knows? I'm thinking Adams has put us on a course to having many options and a plethora of skilled players. With some tweaks we have the possibility to have a defense corps along the lines of the recent Nashville Predators. Our forwards that we have in the NHL and prospects gaining experience most likely will push out some of our older players and make us a contender. That's my optimistic view. 

I guess the disagreement I'm finding with posts like this and others I'm responding to currently is this idea we are nearing some sort of Stanley Cup contender, critical-mass tipping point, or nearing it. 

It's just not the case, I'm sorry, not at all - what we are nearing is a critical mass tipping point, maybe, for being a *reasonable* team. We are seeing signs of putting that together. 

I honestly feel like an entire level, really several, are being entirely skipped. We aren't even a *playoff* team right now. Other teams also will be drafting and developing players - the mere development of Cozens and Power and Quinn, et all, is not the launching point to contender: if our prospects are really good, they will be the launching point to *good team*. The amount of ground we need to cover that people see evaporating away in 2 years merely by the development of the players we have here right now, and the addition of the propects we have coming, is a bridge severely too far, imo. 

If the development our current players undergo is par for the course for what you'd expect for well-drafted players, we will be good. If we are looking at the current in-house talent, both on roster and below, and foresee it developing into a cup contender, in a matter of a few seasons...we need our development success with what we have to be an anomaly - we need everyone just going ceiling, ceiling ceiling. 

Again, other teams also incorporate good young players they draft. 

- - - 

What we may soon have, hopefully, is a window opening up where (To his credit!) Adams will have the tools needed to have a *chance at* assembling a contender. That is when the work begins. What we are working towards is that window - getting on the dance floor - then we shall see how Kevyn Adams and his team can Waltz. 

The window to CONTRUCT what we have, into a contender, might be opening. Actually BEING a contender isn't a situation that's opening up, on the way, it's the chance to gain a *seat* at the chessboard that seems to be on the way. Then we see what kind of player Adams is, and his team.

Edited November 15, 2022 by Thorny

[Curt]

47 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I believe in today's NHL the statistical prime is roughly ages 22-26. @Brawndoor @LGR4GMor someone more up on that stuff can update if they like, but last I looked it was a little younger than one might think. That's just an average though - like you point out, everyone has their own curve. 

I'm not really making a statement that Thompson won't be good at 29/30, merely that it's only a few years away, it would technically buck a statistical trend, and that the thing to keep in mind here is the context that he's our 1C. On a team, in 3 years, where the expectations are presumably *winning* while in the playoffs, right? We know we will need a very good 1C for that. Again, not saying Tage won't be that. Not all all. Merely saying that the idea he may not be producing like he is now is not a Thorny concern - it's a very valid potential likelihood.

My only point in saying this, is to point out we have a few players who are in this realm, where we don't exactly know where they'll be in 3 years. Some of the talk often seems to give off the vive (should be "vibe", maybe, Vaive?) that, "well, hold on now, we've got our top line in Skinner-Thompson-Tuch, just wait for the prospects to come along, THEN we will be great."

GREAT being the functional word, there. I'm leaving aside the prospects thing, granting that they indeed WILL be what we need, for the sake of argument. But that still leaves the guys who ARE producing now - it's not just Thompson who we *might*be seeing close to their best from, already. What I am pointing out is that the chances ALL of these guys maintain form, for when all these prospects join up (surely seamlessly, right?) is very unlikely. 

That simply means that Adams IS going to have have to get into a bit of roster construction and team building beyond that thing a computer can do, ya know, draft and develop (this is a joke, draft nuts don't get mad). And my only point in pointing out that Adams is assuredly going to have to get into some serious team building down the line, is that where it all ends up can only be unknown. 

Again, I think we will be a good team one day, but I'd actually argue we objectively cannot know beyond that. Way way too early. 

TLDR - see @Curt's post.

But, yes, it's not simply as easy as "waiting" for Levi. There *are* in fact merits to pushing for more wins sooner than later. I also witnessed this first hand with the Jets, who thought it was all on the horizon, until, suddenly, it was on the back burner. No, I do not think they are for real this year. 

Regarding statistical primes, I believe you are correct that it’s generally that 22-26ish range, with regards to offensive production only.  It can probably be argued that many players in 26-30 age range have improved defensively and offset much, or all, of any offensive production decline.  There are probably studies out there, I kinda recall seeing a couple, I’m not going to look them up.

I agree that the Sabres certainly have some very good players who are in their prime right now (Skinner, Tuch, Thompson, Dahlin,  Olofsson) but I don’t think it’s enough to start pulling the trigger on win now moves, trading high quality picks and prospects for players in their primes.

I feel like doing right now could actually put something of a ceiling on this team, and limit them from becoming a real contender 2-3 years down the road.  Honestly, I think Buffalo is too far away from being a contender right now to make any consolidation trades to fill roster holes.  I don’t think they can know what those roster holes will be on a Sabres playoff roster.

I think once enough players are in place to make the Sabres a legitimate playoff team, THEN it’s time to push chips in and trade a few good prospects/picks for right now players.

If I was in charge, my plan would probably be to show continued growth this season, and demonstrate to the league/fans that this team is surely on the upswing (mixed bag so far, I know).  By doing that, get some more fans in the seats $$$, and become more attractive to UFAs. Then this offseason, hopefully attract a slightly higher class of free agents, signing another goalie, better than Comrie, to share the net or be the starter, and an additional defenseman at least as good as Lyubushkin, but hopefully a bit better.  If that means giving out a couple $4-5M, 3-4 year deals, I think I’d be fine with that.  Basically doing something similar to what Detroit did this past offseason.

That, along with continuing development of young players, could fill the holes in the roster and make the Sabres a solid playoff team.  Then you see how they do for a year or two.  See who excels in playoff situations, see who exceeds expectations, see who is fitting best into the team, see what areas are holding the team back.  THEN, if necessary, make a big move to cash in some youngsters/picks for players in their prime.  Then compete for the Cup

At least that’s what’s in my mind.

When it comes down to it, I really believe that the Sabres future depends upon how their current group of young players/prospects develop.  If they collectively are not good enough, trades and free agent signings are not going to be enough to push the Sabres to the top.

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, Curt said:

Regarding statistical primes, I believe you are correct that it’s generally that 22-26ish range, with regards to offensive production only.  It can probably be argued that many players in 26-30 age range have improved defensively and offset much, or all, of any offensive production decline.  There are probably studies out there, I kinda recall seeing a couple, I’m not going to look them up.

I agree that the Sabres certainly have some very good players who are in their prime right now (Skinner, Tuch, Thompson, Dahlin,  Olofsson) but I don’t think it’s enough to start pulling the trigger on win now moves, trading high quality picks and prospects for players in their primes.

I feel like doing right now could actually put something of a ceiling on this team, and limit them from becoming a real contender 2-3 years down the road.  Honestly, I think Buffalo is too far away from being a contender right now to make any consolidation trades to fill roster holes.  I don’t think they can know what those roster holes will be on a Sabres playoff roster.

I think once enough players are in place to make the Sabres a legitimate playoff team, THEN it’s time to push chips in and trade a few good prospects/picks for right now players.

If I was in charge, my plan would probably be to show continued growth this season, and demonstrate to the league/fans that this team is surely on the upswing (mixed bag so far, I know).  By doing that, get some more fans in the seats $$$, and become more attractive to UFAs. Then this offseason, hopefully attract a slightly higher class of free agents, signing another goalie, better than Comrie, to share the net or be the starter, and an additional defenseman at least as good as Lyubushkin, but hopefully a bit better.  If that means giving out a couple $4-5M, 3-4 year deals, I think I’d be fine with that.  Basically doing something similar to what Detroit did this past offseason.

That, along with continuing development of young players, could fill the holes in the roster and make the Sabres a solid playoff team.  Then you see how they do for a year or two.  See who excels in playoff situations, see who exceeds expectations, see who is fitting best into the team, see what areas are holding the team back.  THEN, if necessary, make a big move to cash in some youngsters/picks for players in their prime.  Then compete for the Cup

At least that’s what’s in my mind.

When it comes down to it, I really believe that the Sabres future depends upon how their current group of young players/prospects develop.  If they collectively are not good enough, trades and free agent signings are not going to be enough to push the Sabres to the top.

More less agree, with a few caveats

I don't think anyone is suggesting trading high quality picks and prospects for quick fixes. If you are saying you don't believe we should be making any trades at all for players who will help us win now, and better the process, should they be available for reasonable hockey trades, hard disagree. It's not in the name of filling holes, ie "ah, NOW we are a contender", as I agree we can't know all the holes yet, it's in the name of continuing to add talent. There is no ordained path by simply doing nothing. 

As for the last bit, your "comes down to it", I suppose it depends what you mean by "good enough". If our current group has the makings of developing into a good team, yes, I actually do believe the difference between good and great will come down to the work of the GM from there - that's kinda my whole point. If you mean they aren't "good enough" to amount to even a good team, ya, we can't save it with trades. 

 

Edited November 16, 2022 by Thorny

[Curt]

57 minutes ago, Thorny said:

More less agree, with a few caveats

I don't think anyone is suggesting trading high quality picks and prospects for quick fixes. If you are saying you don't believe we should be making any trades at all for players who will help us win now, and better the process, should they be available for reasonable hockey trades, hard disagree. It's not in the name of filling holes, ie "ah, NOW we are a contender", as I agree we can't know all the holes yet, it's in the name of continuing to add talent. There is no ordained path by simply doing nothing. 

As for the last bit, your "comes down to it", I suppose it depends what you mean by "good enough". If our current group has the makings of developing into a good team, yes, I actually do believe the difference between good and great will come down to the work of the GM from there - that's kinda my whole point. If you mean they aren't "good enough" to amount to even a good team, ya, we can't save it with trades. 

 

Trades are hard to discuss as generalities because they are so dependent upon specifics of the players involved.

Im not opposed to trades, full stop.  I’d be fine with, for example, Mittelstadt for the defenseman equivalent of Mittelstadt. (formerly highly regarded young guy who is struggling a bit).  I probably wouldn’t be in favor of Mittelstadt, Krebs, and picks for a 28 year old 3/4 defenseman with a couple years left on his contract.

Im not opposed to adding talent in areas of need, but I’m very hesitant to spend much in the way of assets to do so.

By “good enough” I just mean that they generally succeed.  If the likes of Power, Samuelsson, Jokiharju, Cozens, Krebs, Mittelstadt, Quinn, Peterka, Savoie, Kulich, Östlund mostly fail to meet expectations, then it probably won’t matter what trades or free agent signings are made, the Sabres won’t become a contender.

[Thorner]

Just now, Curt said:

Trades are hard to discuss as generalities because they are so dependent upon specifics of the players involved.

Im not opposed to trades, full stop.  I’d be fine with, for example, Mittelstadt for the defenseman equivalent of Mittelstadt. (formerly highly regarded young guy who is struggling a bit).  I probably wouldn’t be in favor of Mittelstadt, Krebs, and picks for a 28 year old 3/4 defenseman with a couple years left on his contract.

Im not opposed to adding talent in areas of need, but I’m very hesitant to spend much in the way of assets to do so.

By “good enough” I just mean that they generally succeed.  If the likes of Power, Samuelsson, Jokiharju, Cozens, Krebs, Mittelstadt, Quinn, Peterka, Savoie, Kulich, Östlund mostly fail to meet expectations, then it probably won’t matter what trades or free agent signings are made, the Sabres won’t become a contender.

Yup. I was counting the prospects as "made it" to an average, reasonable extent based on their projection, for the sake of argument. 

We need both that to happen, AND work from the GM once we become "good" to shape the team into a "great" one. The "patient" side of the plan also needs to work, or it's all for naught. 

[Gatorman0519]

Another top center and top 6 winger.   2 D-men, and a franchise goalie.

[Marvin]

Another top 4 defencive D.

Another NHL goaltender.

Experience.

[Refuting]

Granato needs to spend the next week of practices teaching ONLY defense 

[HumanSlinky39]

This team isn't going to win consistently until they add the physical element to their game. Five hits tonight. FIVE. 

Nobody is afraid to play the Sabres because it's a cakewalk. Teams glide into our zone because they know there will be very little-to-no punishment for it. I don't know if they're being coached to not hit or if that's just the kind of players they are...either way will not work long term.

[Thorner]

Our only real chance, the thing we truly need if we are going to compete, is to 

TAKE THE FALL

ACT HURT

GET INDIGNANT 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, Gatorman0519 said:

Another top center and top 6 winger.   2 D-men, and a franchise goalie.

Won't make any difference until we bring in attitude, desire, grit and just general will to compete. 

This franchise is utterly clueless. 

[Claude Balls]

The list is way too ***** long to type out. But it starts at the top.

[thewookie1]

Sometimes I honestly wonder if the NHL doctors team's styles from behind the scenes for TV and drama reasons.

Boston and Philly must be bruisers and will be given leeway to create more of it.

Edmonton is to be a free wheeling team.

I say that because Buffalo hasn't had any degree of team wide physicality since at least 2008 and every known physical player we bring on seems to just stop. When is the last time Bush destroyed someone?

[Refuting]

I dont understand why it's impossible for them to play solid defense and throw some checks.

How many Quinns, Peterkas, Mittlestatds do you need? They all do the same exact thing. They're all finesse guys. 

There's not enough ice time for all these guys that do the same thing. Stop drafting 5'10 guys with no physicality or defensive awareness 

Thompson broke out because they FINALLY gave him the ice time REQUIRED to break out. Why do they keep drafting the same exact type of players? 

I'd call the Senators RIGHT NOW and say you can have any of these guys for your best physical D man and Brady Tkachuk: 

Olofsson

Mittlestadt 

Peterka

Quinn 

Krebs 

And you can have our 1st round pick next year too because we would pick CASEY MITTLESTADT again anyway