The Johnson watch has started

[North Buffalo]

I think some of these young guys are over thinking... get some pro experience elc then move on if that is what you want to do.

[Carmel Corn]

I still detest JBOT for even wasting a 1st round pick for this guy in the first place.  Worst GM in franchise history. 

[Standing Room Smoking Cigs]

1 hour ago, Quint said:

Vanek is very hockey smart. I heard him say he'd like to be a GM someday. Briere and Drury are GMS, why not Vanek? His troubles are behind him and he is now mature. Buffalo would be smart to hire him in some capacity.

Agreed... but then again he'll always have that gambling cloud. Vanek will never get a "I make a decision" based job in the NHL, too toxic... He may want to go the Mays/Mantle route and represent Seneca Buffalo Creek as a hobknobber and greeter, because that is probably as close to a job at KBC as he's going to get... Or , maybe there will be a European remake of 'Blazing Saddles' and he could play 'Mongo' like his fellow athlete who had a gambling cloud.... Alex Karras...

 

Edited May 22, 2023 by Standing Room Smoking Cigs
new wording

[Pimlach]

24 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

I still detest JBOT for even wasting a 1st round pick for this guy in the first place.  Worst GM in franchise history. 

Unfortunately no.  Murray was worse.   Murray botched the rebuild in many ways and he did not know enough about the players he was acquiring. 

Botterill made mistakes in Buffalo but he is still in the NHL as AGM for Seattle.  He has a shot at the Pittsburgh GM job because he is considered a very bright guy that others in the league are willing to work with.  

Murray is working midnight shift and weekends at the 7-11 in Shawville, Quebec.  

[sabremike]

15 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Unfortunately no.  Murray was worse.   Murray botched the rebuild in many ways and he did not know enough about the players he was acquiring. 

Botterill made mistakes in Buffalo but he is still in the NHL as AGM for Seattle.  He has a shot at the Pittsburgh GM job because he is considered a very bright guy that others in the league are willing to work with.  

Murray is working midnight shift and weekends at the 7-11 in Shawville, Quebec.  

The "very bright guy" once swapped the first pick of the 6th round straight up for a future 6th round pick which from a purely logical aspect is just about the dumbest trade that has ever been made.

[Carmel Corn]

21 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Unfortunately no.  Murray was worse.   Murray botched the rebuild in many ways and he did not know enough about the players he was acquiring. 

Botterill made mistakes in Buffalo but he is still in the NHL as AGM for Seattle.  He has a shot at the Pittsburgh GM job because he is considered a very bright guy that others in the league are willing to work with.  

Murray is working midnight shift and weekends at the 7-11 in Shawville, Quebec.  

JBOT hired Krueger....that's worse than anything GMTM did.

[Pimlach]

29 minutes ago, sabremike said:

The "very bright guy" once swapped the first pick of the 6th round straight up for a future 6th round pick which from a purely logical aspect is just about the dumbest trade that has ever been made.

The trade of the 6th rounder might have been a low risk favor to another GM.   Who was the pick?  

28 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

JBOT hired Krueger....that's worse than anything GMTM did.

 

Hard to argue with these takes.   

He made some big errors.  I hope Pittsburgh takes him and we keep Karmanos.  

 

 

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, Pimlach said:

It amazes me how out of touch Pegula and his GMs were with hiring head coaches.  Rolston, Nolan, Bylsma, Housley and Krueger - Epic bad choices.  Unfathomable that these were our HC's during the drought.  

It is a sad list in hindsight, but at the time, I do understand some of the logic. 

Rolston - kind of just there and available. It was a cheap and easy hire at a point where they were in transition. I doubt he was considered a long term solution.

Nolan - an attempt to turn back the clock and bring back that lunch bucker work ethic idea. With a lack of talent on the roster I can see how this seemed like a good idea. It actually wasn't a bad idea imo but Murray turned him into a fall guy on a stripped roster that nobody could have succeeded with. He was used and abused by the organization. 

Bylsma - Well we all know who number one choice was and Murray was all in on that with a long term deal. When he played us to get a deal in Toronto Bylsma was plan B as he was available and had had success in Pittsburgh. I know it was a boring style, but it wasn't a terrible idea and Vegas and Dallas are both playing similar hockey to what Bylsma preached. We failed as a team, but I don't think he was a terrible coach. 

Housley - I totally get the logic. Successful assistant, alumni, preached the new era fast style driven by a mobile D. We see that all over the league. We had Dahlin coming in. Seemed like a sensible hire but maybe a bit of a gamble. Obviously he couldn't handle the head job but in the "we don't want an old dinosaur vs. new era thinking"  philosophy I think it made sense.

Kreuger - boggles the mind. I can only come up with one rationale. They were all in on Eichel and it was all about motivating Eichel to be like McDavid so a former coach with some sort of personal motivator resume seemed like a good idea at the time. he talked a good talk and fooled them in the hiring process. His hockey coaching was devoid of anything beyond a simplistic basic philosophy not that different from the old left wing lock which is archaic to say the least. Absolute garbage hire. 

Going to add, Granato - Long resume, but not at the NHL head coach level so in many ways not that different from Housley. He's another cheap hire and although he's a good teacher (and could be a solid assistant on any team or coach at college level) his head coaching ability is still a question mark. This team has not yet shown any ability to play a structured defensive game and until they do, they won't get far even if they have a lot of young talent. 

As an example I will briefly mention Montour.  I've been watching him closely since one, I don't really care who wins, and two, I've been trying to figure out why he's so impactful there and was so bad here and I think I've figured it out. He was always a good skater and had an offensive upside, but here he was always running around and getting caught out of position. Reason was a lack of team support. When a rush failed or a check happened he was scrambling back to cover his spot. On Florida there's always a forward dropping into his spot and taking over his coverage. They recognize the rush and have adapted their game to his talents (and flaws). It's the system, not the player. Similar thing for Gudas. In Philly I remember him running around hitting people and also getting caught out of position. In Florida, again, someone drops into his spot. If we signed him, without a proper defensive systemin place, he's just going to look like Risto. 

Granato might still show us he has it all, but it is time for this team to learn defense to go with that dynamic scoring that we've already started to see. If not, he's going to be added to this list of failures. 

 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

It is a sad list in hindsight, but at the time, I do understand some of the logic. 

Rolston - kind of just there and available. It was a cheap and easy hire at a point where they were in transition. I doubt he was considered a long term solution.

Nolan - an attempt to turn back the clock and bring back that lunch bucker work ethic idea. With a lack of talent on the roster I can see how this seemed like a good idea. It actually wasn't a bad idea imo but Murray turned him into a fall guy on a stripped roster that nobody could have succeeded with. He was used and abused by the organization. 

Bylsma - Well we all know who number one choice was and Murray was all in on that with a long term deal. When he played us to get a deal in Toronto Bylsma was plan B as he was available and had had success in Pittsburgh. I know it was a boring style, but it wasn't a terrible idea and Vegas and Dallas are both playing similar hockey to what Bylsma preached. We failed as a team, but I don't think he was a terrible coach. 

Housley - I totally get the logic. Successful assistant, alumni, preached the new era fast style driven by a mobile D. We see that all over the league. We had Dahlin coming in. Seemed like a sensible hire but maybe a bit of a gamble. Obviously he couldn't handle the head job but in the "we don't want an old dinosaur vs. new era thinking"  philosophy I think it made sense.

Kreuger - boggles the mind. I can only come up with one rationale. They were all in on Eichel and it was all about motivating Eichel to be like McDavid so a former coach with some sort of personal motivator resume seemed like a good idea at the time. he talked a good talk and fooled them in the hiring process. His hockey coaching was devoid of anything beyond a simplistic basic philosophy not that different from the old left wing lock which is archaic to say the least. Absolute garbage hire. 

Going to add, Granato - Long resume, but not at the NHL head coach level so in many ways not that different from Housley. He's another cheap hire and although he's a good teacher (and could be a solid assistant on any team or coach at college level) his head coaching ability is still a question mark. This team has not yet shown any ability to play a structured defensive game and until they do, they won't get far even if they have a lot of young talent. 

As an example I will briefly mention Montour.  I've been watching him closely since one, I don't really care who wins, and two, I've been trying to figure out why he's so impactful there and was so bad here and I think I've figured it out. He was always a good skater and had an offensive upside, but here he was always running around and getting caught out of position. Reason was a lack of team support. When a rush failed or a check happened he was scrambling back to cover his spot. On Florida there's always a forward dropping into his spot and taking over his coverage. They recognize the rush and have adapted their game to his talents (and flaws). It's the system, not the player. Similar thing for Gudas. In Philly I remember him running around hitting people and also getting caught out of position. In Florida, again, someone drops into his spot. If we signed him, without a proper defensive systemin place, he's just going to look like Risto. 

Granato might still show us he has it all, but it is time for this team to learn defense to go with that dynamic scoring that we've already started to see. If not, he's going to be added to this list of failures. 

 

Talk about ignoring the positive to focus on a negative. Who cares if a dozen players had their best years playing under Granato, the guy can't coach defense!!

It was always the plan to fix the scoring first, then work on defense, Granato only said this a hundred times. It's one of the reasons last year was still considered developmental, despite coming within 2 points of the playoffs.

[tom webster]

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It is a sad list in hindsight, but at the time, I do understand some of the logic. 

Rolston - kind of just there and available. It was a cheap and easy hire at a point where they were in transition. I doubt he was considered a long term solution.

Nolan - an attempt to turn back the clock and bring back that lunch bucker work ethic idea. With a lack of talent on the roster I can see how this seemed like a good idea. It actually wasn't a bad idea imo but Murray turned him into a fall guy on a stripped roster that nobody could have succeeded with. He was used and abused by the organization. 

Bylsma - Well we all know who number one choice was and Murray was all in on that with a long term deal. When he played us to get a deal in Toronto Bylsma was plan B as he was available and had had success in Pittsburgh. I know it was a boring style, but it wasn't a terrible idea and Vegas and Dallas are both playing similar hockey to what Bylsma preached. We failed as a team, but I don't think he was a terrible coach. 

Housley - I totally get the logic. Successful assistant, alumni, preached the new era fast style driven by a mobile D. We see that all over the league. We had Dahlin coming in. Seemed like a sensible hire but maybe a bit of a gamble. Obviously he couldn't handle the head job but in the "we don't want an old dinosaur vs. new era thinking"  philosophy I think it made sense.

Kreuger - boggles the mind. I can only come up with one rationale. They were all in on Eichel and it was all about motivating Eichel to be like McDavid so a former coach with some sort of personal motivator resume seemed like a good idea at the time. he talked a good talk and fooled them in the hiring process. His hockey coaching was devoid of anything beyond a simplistic basic philosophy not that different from the old left wing lock which is archaic to say the least. Absolute garbage hire. 

Going to add, Granato - Long resume, but not at the NHL head coach level so in many ways not that different from Housley. He's another cheap hire and although he's a good teacher (and could be a solid assistant on any team or coach at college level) his head coaching ability is still a question mark. This team has not yet shown any ability to play a structured defensive game and until they do, they won't get far even if they have a lot of young talent. 

As an example I will briefly mention Montour.  I've been watching him closely since one, I don't really care who wins, and two, I've been trying to figure out why he's so impactful there and was so bad here and I think I've figured it out. He was always a good skater and had an offensive upside, but here he was always running around and getting caught out of position. Reason was a lack of team support. When a rush failed or a check happened he was scrambling back to cover his spot. On Florida there's always a forward dropping into his spot and taking over his coverage. They recognize the rush and have adapted their game to his talents (and flaws). It's the system, not the player. Similar thing for Gudas. In Philly I remember him running around hitting people and also getting caught out of position. In Florida, again, someone drops into his spot. If we signed him, without a proper defensive systemin place, he's just going to look like Risto. 

Granato might still show us he has it all, but it is time for this team to learn defense to go with that dynamic scoring that we've already started to see. If not, he's going to be added to this list of failures. 

 

It’s hard to believe in retrospect, but Krueger’s hire was lauded by many in the hockey community. Many thought he got a raw deal in Edmonton and he was something of renaissance man.

The point is, as unsuccessful as the Pegula’s hires were, the only “impulse” hire was Lafontaine and he brought Nolan with him. 

[Doohicksie]

3 hours ago, Carmel Corn said:

I still detest JBOT for even wasting a 1st round pick for this guy in the first place.  Worst GM in franchise history. 

I'd rather have Kevyn's second round pick than JBott's first round pick.

[Doohicksie]

2 hours ago, Carmel Corn said:

JBOT hired Krueger....that's worse than anything GMTM did.

Wow.  Hard to argue that point.

[PerreaultForever]

37 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Talk about ignoring the positive to focus on a negative. Who cares if a dozen players had their best years playing under Granato, the guy can't coach defense!!

It was always the plan to fix the scoring first, then work on defense, Granato only said this a hundred times. It's one of the reasons last year was still considered developmental, despite coming within 2 points of the playoffs.

I know, and all I'm saying is that is rhetoric until it's reality. I didn't say he CAN'T coach defense, just that so far he hasn't. It's time to add that. So the verdict is yet to be determined. 

I still think it's backwards. Offense comes naturally to a lot of these guys. It's what they like to do. Playing a team defensive system is much harder, but necessary for success, especially in the playoffs. Defense second might work though idk. Cassidy seems to have Eichel etc. playing better D than  ever before so I give it the benefit of a doubt in terms of which comes first as a plan. 

Do you at least agree that we were close enough and are scoring enough that now is the time for that defense and now is the time to compete for the playoffs and definitely not have another "developmental" year next season? 

[PerreaultForever]

35 minutes ago, tom webster said:

The point is, as unsuccessful as the Pegula’s hires were, the only “impulse” hire was Lafontaine and he brought Nolan with him. 

and some of us (many?) still believe Lafontaine out Murray in was the launching point of the entire crash and burn that followed. 

[PromoTheRobot]

18 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

and some of us (many?) still believe Lafontaine out Murray in was the launching point of the entire crash and burn that followed. 

I thought POHO LaFontaine hired Murray to be his GM?

On November 13, 2013, LaFontaine was announced to be the new President of Hockey Operations for the Buffalo Sabres.

Edited May 23, 2023 by PromoTheRobot

[Eleven]

Is there ANY chance of this thread returning to its topic?

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

Wow.  Hard to argue that point.

Perhaps Pegula was also impressed with Krueger?  The guy could talk.  

Edited May 23, 2023 by Pimlach

[Doohicksie]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

The guy could talk.  

You could go back to my early reactions... I was hopeful like we always are when a new face shows up, but I always felt he sounded like a used car salesman.

[PerreaultForever]

18 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I thought POHO LaFontaine hired Murray to be his GM?

On November 13, 2013, LaFontaine was announced to be the new President of Hockey Operations for the Buffalo Sabres.

I think TP is the only one who knows what really happened and with NDAs and whatever I doubt any of us will ever really know, but the power structure shifted and so did the direction. It was a bizarre moment and the franchise did change after it. 

[Carmel Corn]

On 5/22/2023 at 8:58 PM, Eleven said:

Is there ANY chance of this thread returning to its topic?

Perhaps he will announce his decision before the draft?  If he doesn't announce his intentions by then,  "Fxxx' em" for being completely self-absorbed and showing no regard for a team that not only drafted him, but gave him a wide berth to figure out what he wants to do.

Edited May 24, 2023 by Carmel Corn

[DarthEbriate]

23 hours ago, sabremike said:

The "very bright guy" once swapped the first pick of the 6th round straight up for a future 6th round pick which from a purely logical aspect is just about the dumbest trade that has ever been made.

Ah, yes... this one.

22 hours ago, Pimlach said:

The trade of the 6th rounder might have been a low risk favor to another GM.   Who was the pick?  

This was JBot trading the 2018 BUF 6th (156 overall, 1st pick in the 6th round because the Sabres had finished dead last) during the draft to Toronto (Dubas) who had just finished with 105 points (3rd in the Atlantic and seemingly on an upward trajectory) for the 2019 TOR 6th. So... he was banking on the Sabres beating the Leafs in the standings in 2018-19? I guess?

The 2019 TOR 6th was 177th overall (21 spots later). The Sabres didn't use it. Instead, they packaged it and the 2019 BUF 7th to move back up into the 5th round for Cederqvist. Hey! A good selection for a 5th as he's helping the Amerks. However, the reason they didn't have their own 5th is because it was traded to PIT for tweener F Scott Wilson to help bring that Pittsburgh know-how.

The player Toronto selected with 156 was Pontus Holmberg who has 37 NHL gp and just had a nice series (in a losing effort) for the Marlies. So you could read this as Dubas wanted this guy, moved up, and didn't have to give up anything to make the trade and selection.

[Ctaeth]

Maybe the amerks run will sway Johnson towards joining?  See it as a good place to launch his career?

[shrader]

15 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

Ah, yes... this one.

This was JBot trading the 2018 BUF 6th (156 overall, 1st pick in the 6th round because the Sabres had finished dead last) during the draft to Toronto (Dubas) who had just finished with 105 points (3rd in the Atlantic and seemingly on an upward trajectory) for the 2019 TOR 6th. So... he was banking on the Sabres beating the Leafs in the standings in 2018-19? I guess?

The 2019 TOR 6th was 177th overall (21 spots later). The Sabres didn't use it. Instead, they packaged it and the 2019 BUF 7th to move back up into the 5th round for Cederqvist. Hey! A good selection for a 5th as he's helping the Amerks. However, the reason they didn't have their own 5th is because it was traded to PIT for tweener F Scott Wilson to help bring that Pittsburgh know-how.

The player Toronto selected with 156 was Pontus Holmberg who has 37 NHL gp and just had a nice series (in a losing effort) for the Marlies. So you could read this as Dubas wanted this guy, moved up, and didn't have to give up anything to make the trade and selection.

Was one draft stronger than the other?
Had they already hit a critical mass of prospects all on the same time line and would rather push one back a year?
Could it have been part of some other future considerations deal the teams had made?

There's any number of reasons why a team might do that.  A 21 spot change in two separate drafts really isn't all that much of an attention grabber.  I could very easily see a situation where you're just not interested in anyone left on your board so you decide to trade a low value asset for whatever you can get last second.  Armed with the incredible power of hindsight, I'm not exactly hurting over anyone else drafted after that point (yeah, still a bit early I guess).  And yes, I know the Sabres did draft someone later that year, but in my scenario, they're not finding any value or interested parties in the 7th round.

[tom webster]

2 minutes ago, shrader said:

Was one draft stronger than the other?
Had they already hit a critical mass of prospects all on the same time line and would rather push one back a year?
Could it have been part of some other future considerations deal the teams had made?

There's any number of reasons why a team might do that.  A 21 spot change in two separate drafts really isn't all that much of an attention grabber.  I could very easily see a situation where you're just not interested in anyone left on your board so you decide to trade a low value asset for whatever you can get last second.  Armed with the incredible power of hindsight, I'm not exactly hurting over anyone else drafted after that point (yeah, still a bit early I guess).  And yes, I know the Sabres did draft someone later that year, but in my scenario, they're not finding any value or interested parties in the 7th round.

I’m glad someone brought your first sentence up. All 6th round picks are not created equal.

The rest of the list, as usual, is spot on as well. 

[shrader]

1 minute ago, tom webster said:

I’m glad someone brought your first sentence up. All 6th round picks are not created equal.

The rest of the list, as usual, is spot on as well. 

Honestly, I feel a bit iffy mentioning the strength of draft when you're already down to the 6th round.  I like my last scenario most of all, where they're just not interested in anyone at that point.  I guess that does kind of go along with strength of draft.