JohnC

The Russian defenseman, Victor Antipin, was left off of that 2018 roster. I'm anxious to see how he plays. Would love to see a Bogo resurrection under the new coach!

I think he is going to stay with Utah where he can get more money and play with Rubio. From a publicity standpoint he would be a higher profile player playing with Boston. He would also have a better chance to play in a Championship series if he went to Boston compared to remaining in a conference that has Golden State and Houston. Utah has assembled a good roster and is able to be a serious team, although not a championship caliber of team. My inclination is that he is going to stay where he is.

I agree with you that in hindsight Bylsma was a bad coaching selection. I get tired of coaches who are wedded to their system instead (as you noted) adapting to their talent but also to the changing nature of play in the league. The worst example of that fault is Phil Jackson of the Knicks who insisted in being wedded to the triangle offense even when he didn't have the players to play that outmoded system. Another damaging trait that Bylsma had was that he didn't relate to his players, especially the younger players. He was just too aloof and not engaged with them. In the end Murray sank his own ship with the misfire on his coaching hire.

Overall, he did a decent job of positioning a rebuilding and deliberately collapsed team to placing this team in a position to being competitive. It was never going to be a quick process. But that is not to say that he doesn't deserve criticisms for a number of his moves. I never liked giving up a first round pick for Lehner. Ottawa was looking to move on from him yet he gratuitously gave up a first round pick that could have been used for a player who would now be ready to play on one of the top two forward lines. The Kulikov trade for Pysk certainly wasn't a good deal. I don't want to exaggerate Pysk's talents but I do believe he could have been a competent second or third pairing player on a unit that had a dearth of talent. The Moulson deal was a bad deal from a contract and term standpoint. The biggest criticism many people direct toward him that is warranted is how he miscalculated and bungled assembling a blue line unit. That unit was such a liability that it evaporated any chances for this team to be competitive.

They had a boatload of young players who played well. The young core will only get better. Without a doubt a lot of things went their way last year to enable them to perform beyond expectations. But no one can deny that they have a talented young core that will keep the team on an upward trajectory. Success in the NHL of today is predicated on speed and good skating rather than on heavy hitting and brutish play. They are surely built for success. And they have a coach who will keep the players accountable and staying within the structure.

The former GM rightly criticized Kane because he was the type of player who would be the last player at the rink and one of the first players to leave the locker room. He was also criticized by Murray for not making much of an effort into getting to know his teammates. Those are valid criticisms. I'm not questioning the former GM's characterization of him. But just because he is not a joiner and because he is aloof from the other players that doesn't make him a bad guy. He is simply a different type of guy who doesn't embrace others resulting in others not embracing him. Anyone who watches him play has to acknowledge that he always plays hard and with an edge. And no one can deny that he is one of the most dependable players to stand up for his teammates. Last year it was apparent to me that as the season advanced he played a much more coordinated game with his linemates compared to his usual Lone Ranger style of play. I'm hoping that the Sabres not allow his individual character traits to prejudice their view of him as a player. As a player I know that he has a lot to offer. Could you pleas slow down because I'm having trouble keeping up?

With the addition of Scandella it appears that the Sabres are going to hold on to Kane, at least in the short term. Assuming he stays then it looks like that our top two lines are going to be very good. The players making up the top lines will be Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Okposo, O'Reilly and maybe Baptiste. No matter who you assemble the lines there is a lot of talent to work with. The Scandella deal not only upgrades the defense but it also allowed us to keep our talent in tact for the top two lines. The GM didn't make blockbuster deals to upgrade the defense but he did make a couple of smart deals to buttress the unit and the team.

You could be subject to arrest for promoting robbery.

Name the team that gave him an offer. None did. No team made him an offer that matched his original contract. None. He took a reduction in salary and term in order to stay with the team he was with. That is a fact. How do you measure actual interest? By how much another team was willing to give him. Sure there were teams interesting in exploring him as an option. What materialized? No tangible offers were made. If there were then state which team made him an offer.

I and others have answered this question on many occasions. Technically you are right that he was under contract. That doesn't mean that agents and their surrogates can't find out what other teams would offer him if he was available. It was well known that the Bills were not going to keep him under his original deal. His agents had a notion of how much they wanted him for. So they had a price range to work with when checking out the market. Although contract boundaries are being technically stretched by making inquiries about values on players it happens all the time. It's part of the business landscape. One of the most important functions of an agent is find out what a player's value is. Whether you want to believe it or not agents do find ways to reconnoiter the market, even if it is technically impermissible. When it comes to dollars and cents purity is not a virtue strictly adhered to. No team was willing to pay the price for him to be their starter. All teams scan the market for available players. They place a value on each prospective player. Not one team was willing to pay beyond what they thought was good value. The market spoke.

Contracts absolutely do reflect roster roles. If a team had strong enough feelings on a player it would be expressed through their contract offerings. You don't think that if a team that was serious in wanting him it would have offered him an appealing contract that would have enticed him to leave the Bills, an organization that demanded a reduction in salary to stay? No team gave him that type of offer. The reason why TT wasn't released was because he took a reduction in salary. There were plenty of teams that could have theoretically offered him more if they wanted him. They didn't. TT for them, as for us, is a bridge qb. He had value up to a point. And what is telling is that no team, including the Bills, was foolish enough to go beyond the point with their offerings. We can go in circles until the sun goes down. The reality is he stayed with his team under a reduced contract. Were other teams interested in him? Probably so. But that's not a big deal because marginal qbs have a value up to a point. And no team was going to go beyond a reasonable discount price to sign him. The market spoke and TT responded to it.

Dolan is the owner of the NY Rangers. He is a hands off owner with that endeavor. That hockey franchise is a success. The problem with Dolan isn't that he interfered with the operation of the Knicks because for the most part he didn't. His mistake is to hire names who are grotesquely incompetent to manage the franchise. If Dolan hires a GM such as Griffin or the respected GM of the Raptors in due time the franchise will not only be a success but it would be a destination in which stars will want to go to.

All the teams that you claim had an interest in him could have gotten him if they would have given him an attractive contract. None were willing to do so! You don't think that TT wouldn't have flown the nest if the offers were on par or better than his original deal? Let's get serious here. Those teams that you believe were salivating for his services were not going to offer much more than what the Bills gave him with his reduced contract. I'll say it again that TT is an adequate bridge qb. Nothing more. That is not a slight. He is better than what we have had for a generation. That still doesn't mean that he is good enough to be a long-term franchise qb who will lead this team to anywhere meaningful. Would the McDermott regime have kept him on the team if he didn't take a reduction in pay with a lesser term? If you are unwilling to answer the question I'll do it for you: The answer is no. That is a reflection on the caliber of qb he is. That's my point!

Our views are not controversial. There is a misguided notion that if you don't blindly follow the fawning crowd that you are being disloyal to the cause. The former GM wanted to outright cut the qb. The new regime was only willing to keep him on the roster with a reduction in money and term. The conclusion from the acolytes is that the qb took the reduction because of altruism rather than believing that he had no other choice in order to remain on the team. The second part of the fiction is that the running qb ignored more bountiful offers because he was loyal to the organization that mandated that he take a salary cut. The real core issue isn't about his contract and how many teams coveted or did not covet him. The substantive issue is what caliber qb is he and what is his potential? My resolute position is that he is a reasonable bridge qb. That conclusion bothers a lot of people. So be it.

We have been through this issue a thousand times. You clearly haven't grasped the point. If you don't believe that agents , themselves and through surrogates, send out back door feelers to find out what the market value and interest are then you are unaware of the real world and are naive.

I'm not denying that some teams had an interest in him. Just because there is an interest doesn't mean that teams were going to turn that interest into a consummated deal. If teams such as Cleveland or the Jets had an interest in him it would be for the same reason that the Bills would want to retain him (at a lower price) as a bridge qb. That's my point! I don't consider him a long-term franchise qb and I don't see any other team considering in that light. He is the caliber of qb that you seek as a temporary remedy for the position. Could he have gotten more money with another team? Maybe. But I'm confident that whatever contract he would have signed wouldn't be commensurate with a qb that a team is committed to on a long-term basis. As I stated in a prior post if you want to consider him being better than a bridge qb, a legitimate franchise qb, then so be it. I don't have him in that category. And his current contract terms don't demonstrate that he belongs in that category. It's clear to me that if TT wouldn't have modified his contract he wouldn't currently be on the team. Whaley wanted him off the roster while the new regime was willing to keep him under a more limited contract. That is a clear indication what this franchise thinks of him.

Don't worry the qb talk will pick up as the season advances. Then the draft talk will become very prominent.

As I repeatedly stated I believe that TT is a credible bridge qb. I firmly believe that he is not going to be our long term franchise qb. If you think otherwise that is fine. We'll just respectfully disagree. With respect to the highlighted area go ahead and name those teams. I promise you that I won't ask for proof. I have no doubt that some teams had an interest in him. However, their lack of actual response is a statement in itself.

Buffalo was the best fit for him because it is willing to run a truncated offense to accommodate his limitations. Make no mistake the realization of what he can and can not do as a qb were factors why the organization was willing to keep him only under a diminished contract. Those acknowledged limitations weren't going to expand the market for him. Whether TT was under contract or not has little to do with what his actual market value was. Agents, sometimes through their surrogates, know the value of their clients. The agent for Cousins in Washington knows what his general value is even while he is under contract. One of the most important responsibilities an agent has is knowing his client's worth. We can go in circles on this issue and come to no resolution. But my central point is that TT is a respectable bridge qb, and nothing more. If he was more than what I am stating then the market would have more positively responded to him. It didn't. When you are coerced into a pay cut with a lesser term and you accede to those demands then that is an obvious indication of what your status and value are as a player. I'm very glad we have TT as a bridge qb. He is a better qb than what we have had in a long time. But that isn't saying much. If our aspirations are higher than being average then we need to do better. That's my basic point.

The happiest person in this sordid episode is Jackson. I think he was trying to create more chaos and get himself fired in order to keep his money. As a GM he was an incompetent to the point of being weird and self-sabotaging with many of his peculiar decisions. As someone else stated Griffin would be a good GM candidate and be able to restore some normal order to that storied franchise. Whether one is a Knicks fan or not having a serious team in New York is good for the NBA.

You don't have to divulge private conversations. I can respect your sense of confidentiality. No one's asking for sources. However, if there were teams interested in TT as a starter then name them. A team can have an interest in a player but if there are no serious overtures then the interest is tepid. TT and his agents are not stupid. If he could have gone to another team and started under his original contract he would have done so. He didn't! Let's remember that TT was not being warmly embraced by the Bills. The departed GM wanted to release him and the new regime was only willing to keep him on with a lesser contract. That's the reality of the situation. Can I have a do over? Would not have-----. I appreciate the correction. You are not scolding. This is what you call a teachable moment. On this issue I unequivocally agree with Whaley and Jeffismagic. Speaking of Jeff he needs to be freed from his unjust imprisonment!

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them. At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched. TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

Stay off the Two Bills Drive site at work. If your bosses find out about the disreputable rabble you associate with you will be quickly dismissed.

With respect to the highlighted segment that is one of the significant the weak points that can't be masked. You either have that vision and processing ability or you don't. TT is not a young qb. He has been in this league for at least a half a dozen years. If he hasn't learned to make reads in a timely manner at this stage of his career, he never will. I'm aware that he has only started for two years but he still has been in this league for at least a half dozen years. If his game is still so rudimentary at this point then there is little chance (my opinion) that he will ever master that crucial aspect of the qb position. Truth of the matter is I don't care where TT is ranked as a qb. He can be ranked between 15 to 20 and still not be good enough to lead this team to anywhere meaningful. You point out that mediocre qbs like Hoyer and McCown have been starters. My response is so what! TT is clearly better than those qbs. But what does that get you? It gets you nowhere. That's my central point.