Judging the off-season: the big picture

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Can’t Skinner be cut in the name of accountability and, at the same time, the Sabres be cheap and arrogant for not using the cap space saved?

My opinion:

1) I don’t like Skinner’s game, I can see why Lindy doesn’t want him in the top 6, and won’t miss him as a fan.

2) Skinner is too talented an offensive player to toss aside without having an obvious replacement, or a plan to use the cap space to improve the team.

3) I love Quinn and Benson, but I don’t trust the sample size - or the depth behind them - enough to hand them the keys without a safety net.

My perception of the Sabres opinion:

1) Lindy doesn’t see a role for Skinner, and his play in the 2nd half of the season was enough to sway Adams

2) A demoted Skinner is a distraction detrimental to the culture they want in place next year

3) Adams was/is overly confident he can trade for a Skinner replacement if Quinn/Benson/Zucker don’t work out.

So I guess I am posting both sides in a way, but I don’t think I’m being inconsistent.

 

Honestly? Probably not. I think it’s pretty darn safe to say the move wasn’t born out of accountability if they didn’t even use the space gained. If we are looking at the simplest explanation here, you’d have to be severely drinking the KA kool aid to buy the idea it was done for accountability when they refuse to be accountable themselves. It was done out of accountability, but they just *happened* to not want to spend the money?

it’s sort of getting to be a case of how willingly blind we want to be. They cut him because of cost, obviously 

You said it yourself: the idea it would be addition by subtraction is malformed 

Edited August 27 by Thorny

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Honestly? Probably not. I think it’s pretty darn safe to say the move wasn’t born out of accountability if they didn’t even use the space gained. If we are looking at the simplest explanation here, you’d have to be severely drinking the KA kool aid to buy the idea it was done for accountability when they refuse to be accountable themselves. It was done out of accountability, but they just *happened* to not want to spend the money?

it’s sort of getting to be a case of how willingly blind we want to be. They cut him because of cost, obviously 

Oh I agree money is a factor, actually edited it in to my post, but not before you quoted it, apparently.

If I’m willingly blind - and I’m not discounting that - the glare coming off Skinner’s game is certainly feeding that.

 

[Thorner]

I mean, I was legitimately asking if you changed your mind. I appreciate the attempt at clarification, but no, you’ve switched from “exceedingly arrogant” and “malformed” (strong, strong condemnations) to a paragraph in bold above that doesn’t critique the move at all until point 3, after defending it within the first 2, and even under point 3 keeps the door open for KA to address in season 

full disclosure: I’m really struggling with your motive/bias, here. Look, I always say you are the best poster. I’m not trying to be a d*ck. I think your take here, though, in this one case, is rank. Even a perfectly functioning clock is wrong once a..wait what 

- - - 

Fit and talent can be a factor: but it would be, imo, disingenuous to claim the SAVINGS weren’t the PRIMARY factor when the cost went *unspent*, yet the talent unaddressed. They cared less about addressing talent and fit, afterwords: but they certainly didn’t use the money. The priority was keeping the money saved. That’s where the focus went after the move: which proves the priority 

can they get lucky and it work out? Sure. But it’s a dicey situation because we all know, in our heart of hearts (come on, now) the impetus behind the move was $. The other factors you listed were merely justification. Haven’t you ever heard that old thing about how humans make the choice, first, then come up with the reasons to support their choice, retroactively? 

we were all right the first time, when the move happened: “it depends what they do with it.”

we got our answer. Don’t move the goalposts. Out of respect for this community forum and the conversation we engage in, here, we really shouldn’t. 

Edited August 27 by Thorny

[dudacek]

I’m struggling to reply to this.

It feels like you’re ripping me a new one for suggesting that an opinion that I don’t agree with might be plausibly held by the Sabres brass.

I think there’s a pretty wide gap on the value you and I ascribe to Skinner that underlies this discussion. Beyond that, I mostly agree with you.

My opinion on the move hasn’t changed and neither have my goal posts.

Win and they were right.

[Thorner]

17 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’m struggling to reply to this.

It feels like you’re ripping me a new one for suggesting that an opinion that I don’t agree with might be plausibly held by the Sabres brass.

I think there’s a pretty wide gap on the value you and I ascribe to Skinner that underlies this discussion. Beyond that, I mostly agree with you.

My opinion on the move hasn’t changed and neither have my goal posts.

Win and they were right.

There’s no way they could look themselves in the mirror and say the priority wasn’t savings, if they don’t spend the money. The Sabres DO NOT have plausible deniability, here. That’s my point. You want to grant them the “they actually are doing their very best (regardless of what I, dudacek think)” out and I absolutely will not do it. It’s definitely a line in the sand, we do not mostly agree, it’s paramount in my views on this regime.

the failure to PRIORITIZE winning. If you can’t see that as always having been central to my arguments, one of our stances has certainly changed 

can’t believe I even have to formulate arguments to this, at this point. Just read Brawndo’s posts. There’s an internal cap. The priority isn’t winning. It’s winning while spending less 

How many times does the quiet part have to be said out loud at this point 

Edited August 27 by Thorny

[dudacek]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

There’s no way they could look themselves in the mirror and say the priority wasn’t savings, if they don’t spend the money. The Sabres DO NOT have plausible deniability, here. That’s my point. You want to grant them the “they actually are doing their very best (regardless of what I, dudacek think)” out and I absolutely will not do it. It’s definitely a line in the sand, we do not mostly agree, it’s paramount in my views on this regime.

the failure to PRIORITIZE winning. If you can’t see that as always having been central to my arguments, one of our stances has certainly changed 

I’ve never really been into Sith philosophy.

Bad for the complexion. 

😜

[Thorner]

If anyone thinks the primary reason for buying out Skinner was “accountability” as opposed to cap savings, I have some magical beans you might be interested in.

seriously. Stop carrying weight for a rich owner. 

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’ve never really been into Sith philosophy.

Bad for the complexion. 

😜

It’s not sith. Im not saying they don’t want to win. I’m saying they are focusing on doing so at a cheaper cost than necessary, by choice. 

if you can’t see that….

“well then you are lost.”

Edited August 27 by Thorny

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

If anyone thinks the primary reason for buying out Skinner was “accountability” as opposed to cap savings, I have some magical beans you might be interested in.

seriously. Stop carrying weight for a rich owner. 

I looked past being told my opinion is rank.

And puke emojis being posted beside my posts.

But I’m done with this particular discussion.

You don’t have to argue with me about an internal cap; I’ve not argued otherwise, and you should know that. Just like you know I’m not a Pegula apologist.

I’m not here to be a backstop for your anger at the way he’s destroyed our team.

Happy to talk Sabres with you any time. It’s one of the things that keeps me coming back here.

But if you just want to vent, find somebody else to indulge you.

[Thorner]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I looked past being told my opinion is rank.

And puke emojis being posted beside my posts.

But I’m done with this particular discussion.

You don’t have to argue with me about an internal cap; I’ve not argued otherwise, and you should know that. Just like you know I’m not a Pegula apologist.

I’m not here to be a backstop for your anger at the way he’s destroyed our team.

Happy to talk Sabres with you any time. It’s one of the things that keeps me coming back here.

But if you just want to vent, find somebody else to indulge you.

Even this I find off base and vaguely offensive. Or is it just dismissive? You can hide behind erroneous statements like this if you like, but it doesn’t change the fact it’s not about venting: maybe you just don’t often have people tell you you are flat out wrong about something? There doesn’t have to be some hidden agenda. Some sort of emotion behind it that explains the disagreement: I literally just strenuously, vividly disagree with your ***** and bull stance that, “this is what accountability looks like.” Which is, indeed, what I initially responded to. It’s not just a bad take, it’s a really bad take. It should be called out imo

you don’t have to take the L on it, as much as you should, but pretending it’s about something other than me legitimately disagreeing is where I’ll draw the line, myself 

Ps - thank you so much for graciously “looking past” the emoji I stamped on your post by way of the website features SDS implemented specifically to be used lol. Don’t hate the player, hate the game 

pps - I’ve given out, checks notes, all of 12 “puke” emojis in…9 years of posting nearly 40 000 times.

12. ( and I’ve received 30)

you should be honoured 

Edited August 28 by Thorny

[Sabres Fan in NS]

What in the blazes is going on in here?

The Sabres have turned brother against brother.

[French Collection]

4 hours ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

What in the blazes is going on in here?

The Sabres have turned brother against brother.

The Pegula era just stinks.

[bob_sauve28]

On 8/18/2024 at 3:01 PM, mjd1001 said:

I don't know what to think about getting rid of Skinner.

I don't think he was awful, single handedly hurting the team.  He didn't really play defense, but again, he didn't go into his own end and turn into a giveaway machine. He was a net-negative in his own end though.

Offense?  He still scores. But on the other hand, he is getting to the age where he is declining.  

I guess the reason I don't know how to feel is...whoever his replacement is could/might/probably will score less, but if the Sabres think his replacement in the lineup scores 5-8 less goals, but prevents 8-10 on the defensive end, and does it at a much lower price..that is good?  

I don't have a strong opinion because him being here, or not being here, doesn't move the needle to much to me in terms of how good they are.  I'd LIKE to know the real reason they decided to do this...with specifics.

I remember when they first signed him I was like, well he sure scores a lot of goals, when fired up, but what else does he do? Not a passer, not a hitter, not a great back checker. He did start passing more, but that seemed to fade. Maybe the replacement just adds more chemistry with Tage and Tuch which produces more overall goals. 

[bob_sauve28]

On 8/20/2024 at 9:01 AM, Sabres Fan in NS said:

 

I still think that buying out Skinner was a mistake - they have not replaced his 30+ goals (at least not yet, but who is out there?).

 

He was not a good passer, that's what bothered me about him. Hoping to see better team chemistry at the top. 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, bob_sauve28 said:

I remember when they first signed him I was like, well he sure scores a lot of goals, when fired up, but what else does he do? Not a passer, not a hitter, not a great back checker. He did start passing more, but that seemed to fade. Maybe the replacement just adds more chemistry with Tage and Tuch which produces more overall goals. 

If you want a passer on that line with them it should be Benson. His ability to take pucks off the wall and find teammates is uncanny. That is my only issue with Peterka being on that line, I think he can pass just fine but he's a better trigger guy. I would almost do this...

Benson - Tage - Quinn

Peterka - Cozens - Tuch

It gives Tage 2 defensively sound guys with great passing. It gives Cozens 2 linemates who are fast and will support him by driving the net. 

[bob_sauve28]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

If you want a passer on that line with them it should be Benson. His ability to take pucks off the wall and find teammates is uncanny. That is my only issue with Peterka being on that line, I think he can pass just fine but he's a better trigger guy. I would almost do this...

Benson - Tage - Quinn

Peterka - Cozens - Tuch

It gives Tage 2 defensively sound guys with great passing. It gives Cozens 2 linemates who are fast and will support him by driving the net. 

I love that. 

[PromoTheRobot]

My optimistic take....

Edited August 28 by PromoTheRobot

[nfreeman]

13 hours ago, Thorny said:

Even this I find off base and vaguely offensive. Or is it just dismissive? You can hide behind erroneous statements like this if you like, but it doesn’t change the fact it’s not about venting: maybe you just don’t often have people tell you you are flat out wrong about something? There doesn’t have to be some hidden agenda. Some sort of emotion behind it that explains the disagreement: I literally just strenuously, vividly disagree with your ***** and bull stance that, “this is what accountability looks like.” Which is, indeed, what I initially responded to. It’s not just a bad take, it’s a really bad take. It should be called out imo

you don’t have to take the L on it, as much as you should, but pretending it’s about something other than me legitimately disagreeing is where I’ll draw the line, myself 

Ps - thank you so much for graciously “looking past” the emoji I stamped on your post by way of the website features SDS implemented specifically to be used lol. Don’t hate the player, hate the game 

pps - I’ve given out, checks notes, all of 12 “puke” emojis in…9 years of posting nearly 40 000 times.

12. ( and I’ve received 30)

you should be honoured 

 

OK -- time to chill out a bit.  You are hysterically picking fights here and babbling incomprehensibly.

Get back to talking hockey please.

[mjd1001]

5 hours ago, French Collection said:

The Pegula era just stinks.

To think when he bought the team remember:

"hockey heaven" 

“Starting today, there will be no financial mandates on the Buffalo Sabres’ hockey department”

“There is no salary cap in the National Hockey League on scouting budgets and player development budgets.", ‘If I want to make some money, I’ll drill another well.’”

"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres’ reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."

 

Remember what we were all (most) feeling after that press conference?  And to think, since then basically we have seen the worst run over that length of time EVER in ANY MAJOR sport in North American history. 

It is mind boggling how you can basically proclaim that you are going to take a small market franchise and do anything and everything possible to win the cup (multiple cups) and then proceed to be the worse ever at almost everything regarding success.

That is some seriously messed up stuff if you really think deeply about it.

If you went back to the day of Pegula's press conference and someone told you that over the next 15 year, they would manage 'only' 7 or 8 playoff appearances, 2-3 series wins, and maybe make the conference finals once but never make (let alone win) the cup, well, if we heard that back then we would be pretty disappointed.  But we didn't get that. None of it, not even close.

I think its pretty safe to say Pegula's ownership thus far over the Sabres is the worst ownership performance ever. Anywhere in major sports (unless you want to through in some Donald Sterling lack-of-success with the racism added on top of it)

Edited August 28 by mjd1001

[Pimlach]

4 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

To think when he bought the team remember:

"hockey heaven" 

“Starting today, there will be no financial mandates on the Buffalo Sabres’ hockey department”

“There is no salary cap in the National Hockey League on scouting budgets and player development budgets.", ‘If I want to make some money, I’ll drill another well.’”

"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres’ reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."

 

Remember what we were all (most) feeling after that press conference?  And to think, since then basically we have seen the worst run over that length of time EVER in ANY MAJOR sport in North American history. 

It is mind boggling how you can basically proclaim that you are going to take a small market franchise and do anything and everything possible to win the cup (multiple cups) and then proceed to be the worse ever at almost everything regarding success.

That is some seriously messed up stuff if you really think deeply about it.

I think its pretty safe to say Pegula's ownership thus far over the Sabres is the worst ownership performance ever. Anywhere in major sports (unless you want to through in some Donald Sterling lack-of-success with the racism added on top of it)

Yes, its crazy isn't it?   It is just too painful to go over how poor his leadership has been.  The record speaks for itself.  

[Thorner]

10 hours ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

What in the blazes is going on in here?

The Sabres have turned brother against brother.

It’s always about the take 

[Doohicksie]

18 hours ago, Thorny said:

I think it’s pretty darn safe to say the move wasn’t born out of accountability if they didn’t even use the space gained.

I see it differently.  The accountability is between Skinner and the organization in this case.  He was held accountable by being bought out.  What happens (or not) after that is irrelevant with respect to Jeff Skinner.

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

My optimistic take....

So... an improvement over past seasons then.

[Doohicksie]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

If you want a passer on that line with them it should be Benson. His ability to take pucks off the wall and find teammates is uncanny.

Yeah, almost as good as Mittelstadt.

 

 

 

Too soon?

[Pimlach]

28 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Yeah, almost as good as Mittelstadt.

 

 

 

Too soon?

Just wait for Byram to go out and win the Norris this year.  Did you know he was drafted 4OA?  

[That Aud Smell]

3 hours ago, nfreeman said:

OK -- time to chill out a bit.  You are hysterically picking fights here and babbling incomprehensibly.

Get back to talking hockey please.

[That Aud Smell]

The closer the season gets, the more dread I feel.

Regarding the Sabres, I mean.

The approach of the NHL season isn't making me feel increased dread about life in general.

Not yet, anyway.