Are the 24/25 Sabres a better team today then before the draft? Is this a playoff caliber roster?

[Thorner]

It’s all super wide open and difficult to predict as it stands, imo. The McLeod addition is really more exciting to me than it probably should be, part of that is the concept of the transaction and a lot of it is down to the overall cohesiveness of the roster and how the move fits in with that. 

We are a team that already missed the playoffs, that made more modest moves akin to that of your average team during your average off-season, I think it’s debatable whether we’ve improved on paper, at all*; but I guess because we’ve often seemingly allowed obviously holes to fester, even a more yeoman like offseason from Adams, in a timely matter, seems to inspire some confidence

Others have mentioned the fact that “none of it will matter if the top 6 doesn’t rebound” and I’ve mentioned the only chance of that happening is putting the group in a spot where it has a reasonable chance of success, re: proper depth supplementation. And we’ve seen that. I can see playoffs as possible as things stand, because of the tweaking along the edges we’ve seen from KA, that should keep the runway clear for that said top 6 bounce-back.

I don’t think I’d bet on playoffs outright without a top 6 addition, which is sort of the tipping point between the GM putting the roster in a spot where making it is reasonably possible to where making it is likely.

Edited July 8 by Thorny
*Pre/post Casey Mittelstadt swap

[Doohicksie]

So Carolina signed William Carrier, Eric Robinson and Tyson Jost, all ex-Sabres (though Carrier has played the majority of his career in Vegas).  Let's see how Robbie and Jostie work out for them.

[JohnC]

16 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

current off-season grades from the Athletic.  I thought the synopsis of the "competition" would be an interesting read.  https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5618498/2024/07/06/nhl-free-agency-grades-every-team-2024/

 

 

I skipped Fla, Bos, Tor and the NYR because I think they are playoff teams.  I also skipped Mon and the CBJ because I don't think they'll be competitive.  These 9 teams and the Sabres are the ones likely competing for the 4 remaining playoff spots.  IMHO Car and TB are candidates to take a step back.  I also think Detroit and Pitt have not improved so far this off-season.  Washington looks improved on paper as does Ottawa.

Washington has done a good job in transitioning from their Cup winning and aging group to steadily bringing in younger and faster players to replace them. They had to make this challenging transition and still be competitive and help Ovie in his quest for Gretzy's goal mark. They are taking a big risk with DuBois but it's worth the risk for this mercurial talent. Their front office recognized where the team was at and managed the transition masterfully. KA should study their playbook and learn how to adjust to the changing circumstances. In a dynamic world you can't be static. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 minutes ago, JohnC said:

KA should study their playbook and learn how to adjust to the changing circumstances. In a dynamic world you can't be static. 

That so far is KA's undoing.  

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Washington has done a good job in transitioning from their Cup winning and aging group to steadily bringing in younger and faster players to replace them. They had to make this challenging transition and still be competitive and help Ovie in his quest for Gretzy's goal mark. They are taking a big risk with DuBois but it's worth the risk for this mercurial talent. Their front office recognized where the team was at and managed the transition masterfully. KA should study their playbook and learn how to adjust to the changing circumstances. In a dynamic world you can't be static. 

While I agree that Adams is too static, I don't understand the reference to Washington. Buffalo didn't need a Logan Thompson, or either of the defenders listed, I suppose Roy would be nice but he wasn't signing in Buffalo and I don't want a soon to be 30yr old defender for 6 years. The team is 14mil over the cap and even with LTRI of Backstrom, they have a bit of work to do. I wouldn't trade a pack of peanuts for constantly disgruntled PLD. A guy who is on his 4th team after forcing his way off 3 others. Chychrum they will need to re-sign but Buffalo has Byram now so that is moot.

I guess I just don't see anything that Washington did that is super amazing and masterful. They traded for a guy I don't want anywhere near my team in PLD. Roy they most likely overpaid by a couple of years but still that is nice. Chyrchum, we don't need because we already traded for Byrum. Logan Thompson we don't need because we already have UPL and added Reimer. I guess Mangipane is their best move and I do wish Buffalo was in on that. 

Meanwhile Adams analyzed his roster and decided the entire bottom half of it needed to be changed and then went and added Malestyn, Rafferty, Kubel, McLeod, and Zucker. The only thing that Adams has yet to do is add a true top 6 option. Personally, I think Buffalo's offseason and Washington's are comparable but I like ours slightly more because we traded less and aren't stuck with someone like PLD for another 7 years. 

 

[LGR4GM]

I think Washington has had a good offseason, but I don't see or understand why Buffalo should look at it for anything. Washington made moves they had to, you could argue Adams had to make moves last year and refused. I would agree there, that he is far too slow on the uptake. That all said, Washington sucked last year, they just were able to get loser points. Recognizing they wanted to get better and making trades to do so is almost exactly what Adams did this offseason as well. PLD is the only significant move that Adams could have paralleled, and I think everyone wants him to add a top 6 forward. 

[dudacek]

Unless Dubois has a complete reversal in his game, I prefer the Sabres off-season.

Two decent defencemen in, another out, a lateral move in goal and a middle six winger isn’t going to fix what ails that team.

(And didn’t Buffalo grab their 2 best checking wingers 😜]

Edited July 8 by dudacek

[JohnC]

13 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I think Washington has had a good offseason, but I don't see or understand why Buffalo should look at it for anything. Washington made moves they had to, you could argue Adams had to make moves last year and refused. I would agree there, that he is far too slow on the uptake. That all said, Washington sucked last year, they just were able to get loser points. Recognizing they wanted to get better and making trades to do so is almost exactly what Adams did this offseason as well. PLD is the only significant move that Adams could have paralleled, and I think everyone wants him to add a top 6 forward. 

You missed the over-arching point. Washington has gone through the challenging transition from a Cup winning team to the next era team without bottoming out. The Ovie quest clearly was a factor in balancing between rebuilding and remaining competitive during his pursuit for hockey history. Compare that to the extended period of time (half a generation) where the Sabres seemed to be spinning its wheels. I'm not looking at this comparison between organizations from a one-year assessment. The rebuilding process can be an extended and excruciating process for all teams. I just think that Washington handled this process with more flexibility and craftiness. 

I agree with you that the DuBois acquisition is a risk. They were willing to take it for this talented but mercurial player. Let's see how it works out. 

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Unless Dubois has a complete reversal in his game, I prefer the Sabres off-season.

Two decent defencemen in, another out, a lateral move in goal and a middle six winger isn’t going to fix what ails that team.

(And didn’t Buffalo grab their 2 best checking wingers 😜]

As I stated in my response to @LGR4GM, trading for DuBois and his extended contract is a big risk. It wouldn't have made sense for the Sabres to bring in this type of player. However, they were willing to take the risk that they can stabilize this unstable player and get a return on his untapped talent. We shall see. 

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You missed the over-arching point. Washington has gone through the challenging transition from a Cup winning team to the next era team without bottoming out. The Ovie quest clearly was a factor in balancing between rebuilding and remaining competitive during his pursuit for hockey history. Compare that to the extended period of time (half a generation) where the Sabres seemed to be spinning its wheels. I'm not looking at this comparison between organizations from a one-year assessment. The rebuilding process can be an extended and excruciating process for all teams. I just think that Washington handled this process with more flexibility and craftiness. 

I agree with you that the DuBois acquisition is a risk. They were willing to take it for this talented but mercurial player. Let's see how it works out. 

This assumes they will make playoffs and be competitive based on these moves. We'll see. 

[SwampD]

11 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This assumes they will make playoffs and be competitive based on these moves. We'll see. 

One of the main reasons they made the playoffs last year was their fourth line, which we now have.😂

Edited July 8 by SwampD

[Doohicksie]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

without bottoming out.

Glass coffin

 

(Remains to be seen)

[Cityo'Rasmii]

In Lindy we trust...

go Sabres

[kas23]

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

You missed the over-arching point. Washington has gone through the challenging transition from a Cup winning team to the next era team without bottoming out. The Ovie quest clearly was a factor in balancing between rebuilding and remaining competitive during his pursuit for hockey history. Compare that to the extended period of time (half a generation) where the Sabres seemed to be spinning its wheels. I'm not looking at this comparison between organizations from a one-year assessment. The rebuilding process can be an extended and excruciating process for all teams. I just think that Washington handled this process with more flexibility and craftiness. 

I agree with you that the DuBois acquisition is a risk. They were willing to take it for this talented but mercurial player. Let's see how it works out. 

I wouldn’t want my team’s whole raison d’etre having an aging player beat a record. I want my team to focus on winning a Stanley Cup and I don’t think the Caps aren’t doing that. They would probably normally tear it down, but then Ovie would immediately go skate in Putin’s backyard. Either way, they can go this route because they’ll always have butts in the seats. 

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, kas23 said:

I wouldn’t want my team’s whole raison d’etre having an aging player beat a record. I want my team to focus on winning a Stanley Cup and I don’t think the Caps aren’t doing that. They would probably normally tear it down, but then Ovie would immediately go skate in Putin’s backyard. Either way, they can go this route because they’ll always have butts in the seats. 

The Caps have been in the playoffs 15 times out of the past 17 years. They are making the transition from their Cup team to a new era of players. That's part of the standard lifespan for teams, the normal cycle of building up and then prudently tearing it down. The Sabres have not been in the playoffs for the past 13 years and still counting. Which organization do you think is managing their business better? 

[LGR4GM]

The Capitals actually draft decently well. Not great but they don't do dumb things with their first round picks, or their 2nd round picks. If Buffalo had managed even that since 2014 we would not be where we are. It all comes back to drafting poorly, something Buffalo needed to fix as early or even before 2005. 

From 2005 to 2011, the Buffalo Sabres drafted 52 players of which 12 managed to play 200 NHL games and only 2 managed to be impact players (.25pts for def and .5pts for forwards). That means only 23% of the players we drafted made it to 200 games and only 4% Were what we could call top 6/7 or top 4 players (before you yell at me, I know that defenders can be below .25ppg and still be impactful but I needed a cutoff and that was a reasonable one. It does not exclude any defender that we would otherwise consider amazing based on non-pts related play). For those wondering why I picked 2011 it is not simply because that was the last time Buffalo made the playoffs, it is to demonstrate the underlying rot that was in place before any decisions to rebuild had occurred. By the time Buffalo lost in 2011, the pipeline was a depleted and barren mess with almost no quality to speak of and since the lead time for most NHL guys is 5 years, we were already terminal by the time we reach the 2012 draft. There was nothing outside of aggressive trading that would have salvaged the team. Darcy Regier was not capable of doing that and the lack of pipeline only hindered that effort anyway. 

Darcy also had the 2012 and 2013 drafts. I separated them out because I think they require a little context. In 2012 the Sabres managed to get 200 games from 4 of the 8 players they picked, which is pretty good. The issue? 1 of them is an impact player the rest are not. Linus Ullmark is the only player in the 2012 draft that is a true impact player, although I could see an argument for Jake McCabe who sits at that .25ppg threshold so let's include him. Buffalo getting 2 impact players was good! The issue is that both their first rounders are replacement level types of guys and both of them were forwards, Grigs and Girgs. But we still got 2 impact players which brings us to 2013 where Buffalo drafted 11 times and managed to get 3 players with 2 impact players in JT Compher and Ristolainen. Zadorov we could argue also should count but he's more of a useful 4/5 defender and falls below the threshold. That's great! Except that JT Compher the only forward here doesn't matter, because he gets traded by Tim Murray before ever playing for Buffalo. In the 2 years prior to GMTM Buffalo has actually managed to suck less at drafting. They go from an abysmal 4% impact rate to a nice 16%. They go from a 23% hit rate to a nice 37%. Issue being we have 3 defenders, 1 goalie, and a forward who wont be on the team. We roll into 2014 with just crap developing at forward. 

The Murray years. First, the decision to draft Nylander over Sergachev, to this day is one of the worst drafting decisions not only in Sabres history but in NHL history. True stupidity. Anyways, Murray comes away for his 3 drafts with a record of 24% 200 games and 16% impact players. He made 25 total picks and 4 of them matter but guess what? There's a catch. 2 of Murray's hits are Reinhart and Eichel so.. duh. The other 2 are also forwards which is good. Victor Olofsson is a great 7th round draft pick. The other one? Hagel, a guy that Murray's predecessor would castoff like trash. So he drafted 4 but only 3 ended up playing for Buffalo. He also traded Compher which would have been fine if ROR wasn't traded after 3 years. See the issue we have here is not that he traded for things, it is that he traded a lot for things that didn't stay very long. Murray's time as GM hurt the Sabres.

Jason Botterill did something stupid when he didn't sign Hagel but outside of that we get another bump in drafting. 33% of his picks end up with 200 games and 28% of them are impact guys which is kinda good. Mittelstadt and UPL we can say are impact players. Cozens, impact player, Dahlin and Muel, impact players. Here, finally after over a decade of subpar drafting with only 1 or 2 outlier years, we get 3 decent years on top of eachother. If Ryan Johnson ever becomes something, then it is truly a nice era of drafting. Remember the 5 years lead time? Well these are the guys who have crossed that line and many make up the core (Cozens, Dahlin, Muel, and maybe UPL). We can say the Dahlin pick was easy but there are no 1st round misses in here and the 2nd round guys are starting to look better too. Botterill would probably have kept his job without the "lifestyle maintenance" the Pegula's needed. 

Finally, the only draft we can truly judge yet of the Adams era is the 2020 draft. 5 picks and he hit and hit well on 2 of them. Here we are fudging the numbers a touch because neither Quinn nor Peterka have 200 games but both are over our point threshold and barring injury should get really close to our game mark this year. These are 2 impact players and they make the 2020 draft well worth it. Again Buffalo has managed to hit on the 1st rounder and the 2nd. Good stuff. 

The point of all this writing is to show you the history of the Sabres drafting problem that starts basically from the 2005 season and continued well into 2016. In 52 picks from 2005-2011, Buffalo had an abysmal impact player drafting rate of 4% and that cost them most of the support Eichel could have had in 2015 or 2016. The 3 players they get in 2012 and 2013 are all defenders or goalies so again, the forwards are just not what we need. Trades help that a bit but there was simply no pipeline of young impactful talent developing until you really get all the way to 2017 and then 2019 and 2020. We are talking Ennis, Foligno, and that's it for 2005 to 2017. I am excluding Reinhart and Eichel because any gm could have made those picks and frankly they needed more support coming up with them. We simply couldn't trade from our bad pool to fill all the holes that the bad pool had created. 

2020 might be a turning point in the long run. Not because of Adams specifically, I think we have enough evidence against him to give him too much credit, but specifically because they got 2 impact forwards in the same draft. I think 2021 might end up as a very meh draft for the Sabres, there isn't a lot there that is exciting or showing signs of being impactful. 2022 gives me more hope and 2023 and 2024 do as well. There's a chance we get 2 impact players from each of the 2023 and 2024 drafts (Benson, Helenius, ???) and maybe a few 200 gamers in there too (looking at all the RHD defenders and Novikov). If Buffalo can dial it in (23 and 24 look like they finally got there) then instead of looking at 2020-2025 and saying "oh man, Buffalo missed on so many picks  and it basically poisoned the well" I hope we can say that Buffalo hit on enough impact players that the pool stayed healthy enough for us to plug holes via trade or via promotion. Certainly from 2005-2011, we couldn't say that and I would argue from 2005-2016 we can't. 

To retool you need tools; Buffalo spent a decade with a pair of rusty pliers and some paper clips trying to fix up their car and couldn't understand why they could trade those things to get the parts they needed. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

👀

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

The Capitals actually draft decently well. Not great but they don't do dumb things with their first round picks, or their 2nd round picks. If Buffalo had managed even that since 2014 we would not be where we are. It all comes back to drafting poorly, something Buffalo needed to fix as early or even before 2005. 

From 2005 to 2011, the Buffalo Sabres drafted 52 players of which 12 managed to play 200 NHL games and only 2 managed to be impact players (.25pts for def and .5pts for forwards). That means only 23% of the players we drafted made it to 200 games and only 4% Were what we could call top 6/7 or top 4 players (before you yell at me, I know that defenders can be below .25ppg and still be impactful but I needed a cutoff and that was a reasonable one. It does not exclude any defender that we would otherwise consider amazing based on non-pts related play). For those wondering why I picked 2011 it is not simply because that was the last time Buffalo made the playoffs, it is to demonstrate the underlying rot that was in place before any decisions to rebuild had occurred. By the time Buffalo lost in 2011, the pipeline was a depleted and barren mess with almost no quality to speak of and since the lead time for most NHL guys is 5 years, we were already terminal by the time we reach the 2012 draft. There was nothing outside of aggressive trading that would have salvaged the team. Darcy Regier was not capable of doing that and the lack of pipeline only hindered that effort anyway. 

Darcy also had the 2012 and 2013 drafts. I separated them out because I think they require a little context. In 2012 the Sabres managed to get 200 games from 4 of the 8 players they picked, which is pretty good. The issue? 1 of them is an impact player the rest are not. Linus Ullmark is the only player in the 2012 draft that is a true impact player, although I could see an argument for Jake McCabe who sits at that .25ppg threshold so let's include him. Buffalo getting 2 impact players was good! The issue is that both their first rounders are replacement level types of guys and both of them were forwards, Grigs and Girgs. But we still got 2 impact players which brings us to 2013 where Buffalo drafted 11 times and managed to get 3 players with 2 impact players in JT Compher and Ristolainen. Zadorov we could argue also should count but he's more of a useful 4/5 defender and falls below the threshold. That's great! Except that JT Compher the only forward here doesn't matter, because he gets traded by Tim Murray before ever playing for Buffalo. In the 2 years prior to GMTM Buffalo has actually managed to suck less at drafting. They go from an abysmal 4% impact rate to a nice 16%. They go from a 23% hit rate to a nice 37%. Issue being we have 3 defenders, 1 goalie, and a forward who wont be on the team. We roll into 2014 with just crap developing at forward. 

The Murray years. First, the decision to draft Nylander over Sergachev, to this day is one of the worst drafting decisions not only in Sabres history but in NHL history. True stupidity. Anyways, Murray comes away for his 3 drafts with a record of 24% 200 games and 16% impact players. He made 25 total picks and 4 of them matter but guess what? There's a catch. 2 of Murray's hits are Reinhart and Eichel so.. duh. The other 2 are also forwards which is good. Victor Olofsson is a great 7th round draft pick. The other one? Hagel, a guy that Murray's predecessor would castoff like trash. So he drafted 4 but only 3 ended up playing for Buffalo. He also traded Compher which would have been fine if ROR wasn't traded after 3 years. See the issue we have here is not that he traded for things, it is that he traded a lot for things that didn't stay very long. Murray's time as GM hurt the Sabres.

Jason Botterill did something stupid when he didn't sign Hagel but outside of that we get another bump in drafting. 33% of his picks end up with 200 games and 28% of them are impact guys which is kinda good. Mittelstadt and UPL we can say are impact players. Cozens, impact player, Dahlin and Muel, impact players. Here, finally after over a decade of subpar drafting with only 1 or 2 outlier years, we get 3 decent years on top of eachother. If Ryan Johnson ever becomes something, then it is truly a nice era of drafting. Remember the 5 years lead time? Well these are the guys who have crossed that line and many make up the core (Cozens, Dahlin, Muel, and maybe UPL). We can say the Dahlin pick was easy but there are no 1st round misses in here and the 2nd round guys are starting to look better too. Botterill would probably have kept his job without the "lifestyle maintenance" the Pegula's needed. 

Finally, the only draft we can truly judge yet of the Adams era is the 2020 draft. 5 picks and he hit and hit well on 2 of them. Here we are fudging the numbers a touch because neither Quinn nor Peterka have 200 games but both are over our point threshold and barring injury should get really close to our game mark this year. These are 2 impact players and they make the 2020 draft well worth it. Again Buffalo has managed to hit on the 1st rounder and the 2nd. Good stuff. 

The point of all this writing is to show you the history of the Sabres drafting problem that starts basically from the 2005 season and continued well into 2016. In 52 picks from 2005-2011, Buffalo had an abysmal impact player drafting rate of 4% and that cost them most of the support Eichel could have had in 2015 or 2016. The 3 players they get in 2012 and 2013 are all defenders or goalies so again, the forwards are just not what we need. Trades help that a bit but there was simply no pipeline of young impactful talent developing until you really get all the way to 2017 and then 2019 and 2020. We are talking Ennis, Foligno, and that's it for 2005 to 2017. I am excluding Reinhart and Eichel because any gm could have made those picks and frankly they needed more support coming up with them. We simply couldn't trade from our bad pool to fill all the holes that the bad pool had created. 

2020 might be a turning point in the long run. Not because of Adams specifically, I think we have enough evidence against him to give him too much credit, but specifically because they got 2 impact forwards in the same draft. I think 2021 might end up as a very meh draft for the Sabres, there isn't a lot there that is exciting or showing signs of being impactful. 2022 gives me more hope and 2023 and 2024 do as well. There's a chance we get 2 impact players from each of the 2023 and 2024 drafts (Benson, Helenius, ???) and maybe a few 200 gamers in there too (looking at all the RHD defenders and Novikov). If Buffalo can dial it in (23 and 24 look like they finally got there) then instead of looking at 2020-2025 and saying "oh man, Buffalo missed on so many picks  and it basically poisoned the well" I hope we can say that Buffalo hit on enough impact players that the pool stayed healthy enough for us to plug holes via trade or via promotion. Certainly from 2005-2011, we couldn't say that and I would argue from 2005-2016 we can't. 

To retool you need tools; Buffalo spent a decade with a pair of rusty pliers and some paper clips trying to fix up their car and couldn't understand why they could trade those things to get the parts they needed. 

Nice analysis.  2 additional points to mention.  The Sabres poor drafting is covered in large overlap by the "video scouting" era.  MANY here opposed it & a big argument against was, if it was as big a failure as feared, it wouldn't be proven out for 4 or 5 years, and at that point a lot of damage would be done.  It sure seems to have failed as spectacularly as feared.

And, Murray's plan could've worked, we'll never know for sure because Botterill's preferred players were pretty much a 180 from what Murray was bringing in.  Had Botterill (or ideally someone that didn't love trading picks for presumptive 3rd liners that actually played barely like 4th liners) not wanted to swap from the LA model to more of a Pittsburgh model, they could've rejoined the league sooner than they are on pace to do.

That sort of total direction change was a big part of why the Bills went 17 years between playoff berths.  (We're a 34 team, no a 43 team, no 34, no 43 and personnel had to be adjusted accordingly.  That, churning highly drafted RBs & DBs & having no legit QB were a recipe for failure.)

Adams shifted gear from Botterill's build; but at least both wanted fast teams.  So, the kids Botterill drafted could be a part of the new, newer, newest core.

[JP51]

I think Adams had the right focus... remains to be seen if he got the right people... so I would say we are balanced better if the signings which I see really as 2nd 3rd tier pan out to be mostly 2nd tier maybe one pushes first tier with production. If they prove to be a Corey Stillman or ErikJohnson even Clifton like signing/trade then we still may be better with the Ruff factor... so all in all I say I like this team better than last year. Did they do enough to make the playoffs... someone give me a quarter, we can go best 2 out of 3 flips. 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, JP51 said:

I think Adams had the right focus... remains to be seen if he got the right people... so I would say we are balanced better if the signings which I see really as 2nd 3rd tier pan out to be mostly 2nd tier maybe one pushes first tier with production. If they prove to be a Corey Stillman or ErikJohnson even Clifton like signing/trade then we still may be better with the Ruff factor... so all in all I say I like this team better than last year. Did they do enough to make the playoffs... someone give me a quarter, we can go best 2 out of 3 flips. 

One thing that helps, especially w/ learning a new system, is there was only 1 new D man brought in & he's likely the 7 but who gets a fair # of games situationally &/or due to injury.  It often takes well into a 1st season in a new place for a D-man to settle in w/ his new teammates.

[JP51]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

One thing that helps, especially w/ learning a new system, is there was only 1 new D man brought in & he's likely the 7 but who gets a fair # of games situationally &/or due to injury.  It often takes well into a 1st season in a new place for a D-man to settle in w/ his new teammates.

I agree (especially Bowen), I think even further to that the bread and butter if we are to improve will come internally a new system could result in a slower start followed by marked improvement. I like we have more size, I hope we take away space much better, maintain puck control in smaller space and absolutely need to win more faceoffs I would rather be chased than chase. 

[JP51]

23 hours ago, JohnC said:

You missed the over-arching point. Washington has gone through the challenging transition from a Cup winning team to the next era team without bottoming out. The Ovie quest clearly was a factor in balancing between rebuilding and remaining competitive during his pursuit for hockey history. Compare that to the extended period of time (half a generation) where the Sabres seemed to be spinning its wheels. I'm not looking at this comparison between organizations from a one-year assessment. The rebuilding process can be an extended and excruciating process for all teams. I just think that Washington handled this process with more flexibility and craftiness. 

I agree with you that the DuBois acquisition is a risk. They were willing to take it for this talented but mercurial player. Let's see how it works out. 

I agree here... there is a difference between a re tool and the abject and unparalleled gross incompetency that is the Sabres. In fact as you look at comparisons between teams there really is no one in the NHL that deserves to be compared to the Sabres maybe the Yotes but they left for Utah... 

[GASabresIUFAN]

19 hours ago, Cityo'Rasmii said:

In Lindy we trust...

The Sabres should give each fan on opening night a coin with a cameo of Lindy on the front with "in Lindy we trust", and the Sabres logo on the back. 

[Doohicksie]

On 7/7/2024 at 12:34 AM, Doohickie said:

My guesses are:

• Zucker:  61
• McLeod:  71
• Malenstyn:  17 (I have a feeling 47 was assigned to him but who knows?)
• Lafferty:  28
• Aube-Kubel:  96

• Zucker:  17
• McLeod:  71
• Malenstyn:  29
• Lafferty:  81
• Aube-Kubel:  96

Well I got McLeod and Aube-Kubel right anyway.

Additionally,

• Gilbert:  8
• Reimer:  47

 

Edited July 23 by Doohickie