JohnC

When calculating what you gave up to select the qb that you targeted you have to put it in perspective. The Bills did not give up a first round pick for Allen. They traded positions in the first round with the Cardinals and kept their second round pick which they used in another first round trade up. When examining the two second round picks that were given up for the deal part of the calculation one can make is that the Bills gave up their second round pick and the second round pick that was acquired in a deal for Watkins. Last year, this new regime made deals to acquire extra picks for the expressed purpose to use them to acquire a high end qb prospect. That's exactly what they did. So when all is said and done the Bills still had a full draft (three picks in the first three rounds/two first round and a third round pick) and they still were able to get the qb they coveted.

Bandit will now allow you to ride on his bus. However, no free rides. Bring some tokens. Of all the top tier qbs it was understood that he would require more time before being ready to play. If patience wasn't part of the equation he wouldn't have been selected.

The Buffalo market is far from being an anchor hockey market. Tickets this year on the sub market were going for $10 and some bought tickets couldn't even be given away for free. When Toronto plays in Buffalo half the arena is from fans crossing the Peace Bridge. I'm a hardcore Buffalo fan but I'm not going to rate this market comparable to a legacy market. As I stated in my original posts Gary Bettman (the commissioner you boo) was instrumental in keeping this franchise in Buffalo when it was in jeopardy to be moved or dissolved. You disagree with that portrayal while I don't. Bettman can be a tiresome dullard but I'm forever grateful for his support for the franchise when it was staggering. Because of that I will never boo him.

You and I are just going to respectfully disagree. The assumptions you are making are based on the status of the team now rather than when it was in a very precarious financial state. The team was in a state of bankruptcy where it couldn't even meet its required cash/flow to function and continue to exist. The league was injecting money into the operation to keep it afloat. And some of the owners were not happy propping up the franchise. You seem to be portraying the franchise at that time as being an anchor franchise in the league. It wasn't. It was a failed business that required a convicted fraudster owner to intermingle money from his cable operation with his hockey operation. The irony is that what he was doing was illegal but kept the franchise hanging on when it should have collapsed. At the time there were some owners who were arguing to move the franchise and others arguing simply to dissolve the franchise/carcass and sell off the assets. Gary Bettman throughout that stressful period was a mainstay force arguing to do what had to be done to keep the franchise in Buffalo. If you believe otherwise then so be it. You can boo him if you want but I'm not going to join you in disparaging a person who was instrumental in keeping the franchise in Buffalo.

I don't understand your reasoning. All the qbs in the top tier were ranked highly by the teams needing qbs. I'm sure that each team had different rankings but they were close enough that if their top option wasn't available they would comfortably have settled with one of the other options. If the Bills couldn't have gotten Allen they would have not hesitated to taken Rosen or whomever they ranked next on their board . If the Browns would have taken Darnold it's probable the Jets would have taken Mayfield or their next ranked qb and be happy with the outcome. The argument many are presenting here is that because one qb was taken over another qb then that qb is considered a diminished player. It appears that Rosen wasn't considered to be the top choice for the qb vying teams. So what? He was considered a serious candidate by all those qb needy teams. It seems that Rosen felt that he should have been the first qb taken. So a highly competitive person who had a different expectation as how the draft was going to unfold felt the sting of rejection, at least in his mind. The comments he made after the draft were similar to what other players made when they were selected later than they thought. In the end Rosen went to a team that was probably the best situation for him. It can be reasonably argued that he is in a better situation than the other qbs are in. My belief is that he is going to be a resounding success, and so are the other qbs.

That added attraction probably means that Antipin is a subtraction.

The volleyball coach not only didn't say anything good about him he also didn't say anything bad about him. A negative response is being imputed from basically a non-response. And then what was imputed was turned into a public criticism of the character of a player who is not on your team. That's not right.

What bothers me is that there is an insinuation made in public about a prospect that shouldn't have been made public. There is no need for someone from an organization to "hint" that there were questionable personality traits that factored in to why he wasn't selected by the Browns. It seems to be unfair and unprofessional. There was no need for it. Especially because of the position it is certainly understandable why a person's personality is considered when selecting a prospect. His personality is different from Mayfield's and the other qbs he was vying with. If his less than warm or congenial personality is a reason which contributed to separating him from another prospect then so be it. There's nothing unfair about it. But what is unfair is making a public aspersion on a player when it wasn't necessary. That to me is unprofessional.

That's utter nonsense. The league took over the team. This team was vulnerable to being bought by outside entities. He kept the ship floating and was insistent on trying to keep it in Buffalo before putting it up for a real auction with all bidders.

If the Sabres would have been moved they would have been gone for perpetuity. You don't have to be appreciative but I am.

I'll never boo Bettman because he was one of the biggest reasons why the team was kept in Buffalo when it was going through a bankruptcy and auction. He was the authority behind the scenes who did everything he could to stabilize a franchise undergoing a financial calamity. At the time this very fragile franchise was being eyed by outside entities who wanted to swoop on its decaying carcass and move it to other locations. If the NHL had another commissioner who wanted a bigger market team and wasn't enamored with the situation here this team would have been relocated. Bettman deserves bouquets and not boos from the fans of the Sabres. https://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/news/2015/08/10/nhl-commissioner-gary-bettman-lauded-for-keeping.html

The Philly story of him being involved with an altercation or conflict there was debunked by the people in Philly. There were reports that he missed appointments with teams was probably true. It's obvious that he isn't very mature. There is a possibility that there was a deliberate smear job by his jilted agent. Because of the swirling rumor mill Guice lost some value on draft day. The Skins made out in this sad public saga.

By all reports the Sabres are exploring moving O'Reilly but the preliminary offers are not close to matching his value. What makes it even more difficult to move him is not his annual salary but the remaining length of his contract. Make no mistake the Sabre brass are open for business but they are not going to be fleeced. The Moulson deal was a boondoggle deal by the tough talking former GM. Again, what made the deal so onerous for us is its length where the clock on his bloated contract still has plenty of time to run. With respect to Bogo I still have some unrealistic hope that he can make a comeback. The problem is that very often hope doesn't match reality. If Bogo can regain his health he very much fits in with what Houlsey wants his defense corps to accentuate i.e. skating and attacking. He needs to get away from his guerrilla game and become more of a finesse player. I have a different perspective on pursuing Tavares. I don't want the team to do it. The Sabres have to build for the future and not get weighted down with a super star whose next contract is going to be locked in for nearly another decade. Without question he's a great player. However, as with pursuing Moby Dick there are dangers when it is finally caught and it doesn't turn out what you expect it to be. Let's build the roster for the future and not be boxed in and lose out on our own in-house talent because there is little cap room. It's not about what's over there----it's about what you got here.

The basic point was with the gargantuan and lengthy free agent contracts you are encumbering your franchise for a long time. Paul Hamilton felt that those types of high profile deals are going to diminish to the point of nearly vanishing. The central point is because of the cap system player development and not market splurging is the best way to work with the current system. The same reasoning and strategy applies to both pro football and hockey.

I would say no because future contracts for players such as Rheinhart have to be factored in. One of the reasons why Kane needed to be traded was that it would consume too much of the cap that would have to be dedicated to contracts that were going to be in the pipeline.

I'm not a Lehner fan. Giving up a first round pick for him was a mistake for a player that Ottawa wanted to get rid of. In Lehner's defense our defense was atrocious. The Sabres need steady goal tending and goalies that don't give up goals on pedestrian shots.

On WGR they were talking about Dahlin. The point was made that although the videos show sparkling highlights he also is a hitter and has an ability to play a rugged game which wouldn't be shown on youtube videos. With Dahlin, Mittlestadt and Eichel you not only have very good players but you have exciting players to watch. If Nylander can take a leap forward then that will be an added boost. He's still very young but his play so far is not very distinguishable. That worries me.

This post is well timed. There was a discussion with Paul Hamilton on WGR talking about the cost of free agents and how teams are built. He made the point (that you are alluding to) that signing big time free agents for costly long term contracts takes away your ability to make future moves. Paul Hamilton made the point that the waive of the future is to go after college players and European players because it is a smarter way of managing your cap and giving yourself more roster flexibility.

What you see represented with the drafting of players such as Harrison Phillips and the acquisition of Trent Murphy that a priority is placed on full effort players who are self-motivated not only when they play but when they prepare. From a talent standpoint Marcell Dareus towers over these two blue collar players. However, it's not surprising the big time talent with the jiggly body is gone. A McDermott player is not the type of player you worry about coming into camp out of shape or snoozing in the dark room while the game film is being reviewed. A culture is built by the type of people who inhabit the room.

I just woke up and looked in the mirror with great anticipation. What was reflected back to me was a little less than repulsive. I climbed back into bed hoping it was a bad dream. Reality can be so harsh that a cup of potent java is not required to jolt one out of their fanciful illusions. On a positive note hopefully after nearly a quarter century the Bills got their franchise qb and the Sabres got their version of Bobby Orr to wake up the slumbering hockey team. All this was done in a weekend. The moral of the story is that it is not how you look but how you feel.

Every point you have just made about him is spot on. But what is encouraging is that as the evaluation process proceeded most of the evaluators have made the same observation that he has improved with his mechanical problems. When you watch some of his tape there are plays where he is stunningly sparkling and make plays that few can make. Interspersed with his knockout plays are mundane plays where he is off the mark. When the play is critiqued you can see the less than sterling setups and mechanics. Without question he is not a finished product. And without question he has an upside that few others can ever attain. The selection of Josh Allen not only was a great pick it was an exciting pick. I would rather take a risk for greatness rather than be timid and strive to be respectable. I am elated! The bus that Bandit is driving is the bus that I am also riding on.

The quantity of posters on the hockey site is small compared to the football side of this site. But what I can comfortably say is that the core group of posters do know their stuff. While strong views and disagreements are evident they are presented in a more intelligent and respectful manner. I'm not good enough to be part of this intelligentsia but I'm smart enough to recognize it when I see it.

Kiper's views on Allen were consistent from the beginning of the extended evaluating process right to the end. In fact, he was ridiculed for having Allen being the first qb taken when he put out his first draft board. Mel the gel kept his stance on Allen while many of his draftnik associates strongly disagreed with him. While his big board and other draft boards fluctuated in their ranking of players Kiper's position on Allen was fairly consistent.

As I have said in prior post what's telling to me is that it was reported that the Cardinals tried to trade up to get Allen. They couldn't match our offer so they ended up moving up to get Rosen. I liked all the qbs in the upper tier in this draft class. I would have been happy with any of them. Rosen is the most prepared to start right away. But the real measure is not how well they do in their rookie year but how well will they do after a few years in the league.

There was no conspiracy in Cleveland to outsmart the suitors for Mayfield because even within the scouting departing and front office there was no unanimity on whom to take. As it is often the case there were different voices advocating different selections right up to the end of the process. One of the strongest advocates for Mayfield was Scot McClaughan (sic) who for much of the process favored Mayfield. Dorsey took the input and decided on Mayfield. The writer in the article who was trying to say something was really saying nothing.