JohnC

I was watching part of that game. They are good. Austin Mathews isn't as dynamic as Eichel is from a skating and hard shot standpoint but he reminds me of Reinhart from an intelligence standpoint. His ability to ease into the sweet spots is uncanny. He doesn't dance around with the puck as Eichel does---he quickly releases his accurate shots on goal. The hallmark of this team is that they can skate and they are fast. They're not bangers but they have three skilled lines all populated with young players. Got to give credit where credit is due. Anyone who thinks the Sabres are on par or better than the Leafs is a hometown bigot.

Loved the Dick Van Dyke show. Loved her legs and squeaky voice. The cast was terrific.

Could you direct your response to that good fellow named Kirby? He's not listening to me. The more I try to reason with him on this issue the more resistant he is to what I am suggesting. Maybe another more mellow voice might make him more receptive?

I have never argued otherwise. That doesn't mean that you shy away from a daunting decision because you are haunted by prior decisions. If the front office identifies a qb that they believe is a potential franchise qb then they should select him. If they believe that the qb they identified can be reached at a lower spot then show some flexibility and creativity and trade down. Having TT as a bridge qb is not a reason not to select a qb. It is a reason to select one now because you have some time to develop the prospect. What happens if Cardale demonstrates that he can be a franchise qb? Great. I'm not going to complain about an abundance of players at that position---I'm going to revel in that status. Then let the competition begin.

I live in the Md/DC area. So there is a lot of discussion on this topic. Cousins and his representatives are asking for top of the qb market contract and have not shown much flexibility. Their GM is not going there. If a deal can't be reach then odds are the GM will franchise him and see how much they can get for him. If San Fran offered two #1s, the franchise tag cost, I believe the GM will accept that deal. I'm a Cousins fan and believe that if he played for Buffalo it would provide a positive jolt to our sluggish team. But the contract he is holding out for is beyond his talent level. However, he and his reps believe that there is such a shortage of good qbs that if he can get to the market he can attain his lofty desires.

Would you trade down in the first round for Mahomes? Would you consider Trubisky at the 10th spot if Watson is not available? Having a bridge qb on the roster (assuming TT is retained) is a good situation to bring a good qb prospect in now. The waiting until next year is an approach that we have followed for a generation.

Is it bad grammar to end a period with an exclamation point?

There is no such thing as "what if" points. Difference makes get hurt on all teams. How do you redo crediting points when McDavid, Price, Cosby, Malkin, Patrick Kane, Toews get hurt and don't play for extended period of times. You either make the playoffs or you don't. With respect to the highlighted area name one person who said that Eichel wasn't a difference maker? When you chase the bogeyman and catch him let me know who it is.

The Skins would slap him with a franchise tag if they can't come to a contract deal. Their GM would be willing to trade him for a couple of first round picks and move on. Cousins is asking for top qb money and he seems to be firm in his stand. So what seemed inconceivable could actually materialize. If Shanahan gets the job in San Fran he might be willing to pursue a trade deal with the Skins. Shanahan worked with Cousins in Washington and helped him develop his game. Cousins would significantly improve the offense in Buffalo. The players who would be the most happy with his signing would be Watkins and Clay. Would I give up a couple of first round picks for him? I would consider it. Cousins is not an elite qb but he can be a good qb. Let's put things in perspective. Would giving up two first round picks for Cousins be a better value deal than giving up two first round picks for Watson, a receiver? Absolutely. (The deal is really giving up an extra first because you are getting a player for your first round pick this year.)

In my campaign to promote the retention of Kane I want to point out that his line scored two goals. He had an assist and was plus two in this game. The Gionta-Gergensens-Kane line is adding balance to the other top two lines. What I'm hoping to see and am seeing it is secondary players like Gergensens are starting to find a role and providing production. When you have more scorers on more lines you have a greater capability to come back when behind. Observations: It was good to get Kulikov back. I thought he played reasonably well for someone who hasn't played for a long time. When Franson places his shots on net or near it he becomes more valuable. When watching Reinhart you realize his value from the intelligent way he plays. Stats don't demonstrate how valuable he is to this team. The same sentiment applies to O'Reilly. When McCabe gets back our defense corps will be adequate to a little less than solid. It is not as dire as people make it out to be. Getting rid of a scorer (Kane) from this roster only magnifies the mistakes our defense and goalies makes. The Sabres are on a good run and are fun to watch. I'm not sure they will make the playoffs but I'm hoping that the last quarter of the season has meaningful games. Ultimately this year it is not about making the playoffs (love to see) as it is building a roster for the long term.

If you miss on a qb you don't then lament your plight and become timid because you failed to click with your selection. You get back at it. Teams miss with high picks for all positions. Doing the turtle and hiding in your protective shell may be an act of protection but it is not a positive response that leads to a solution. In your list I would gladly take qbs such as Wentz or even Goff. The instant judgment for a position that requires a development period for qbs makes little sense. As you stated for every Derek Carr there is a John Beck. Most people are aware of the odds of hitting a bonanza. But that shouldn't be an argument for not participating in the action---it is an argument to make more attempts to get back into the action to improve your odds of hitting the mark. I am not a TT basher. My current position is to keep him because he is our best option. But having him on the roster is not a reason for not pursuing a qb with more of an upside---it's the opposite. Because we have a bridge qb the Bills are in a better position to find a better long term option and give that prospect time to develop. TT is a viable option for now; he is not a long term solution for anything meaningful. The Nix/Whaley tandem has been in operation for at least five years. What do they have to show for it? A Rex reclamation qb was brought in to fill the void. That's not good enough.

Let's put aside the top of the draft type of qbs such as Luck, Marioto and Ryan etc. With a little creativity and flexibility excellent prospects such as Carr and Bridgewater were attainable. This isn't from a perspective of looking back. They were acknowledge good prospects entering the draft .They weren't players that came out of nowhere and surprised people such as Dak. Flacco was selected by the Ravens when Newsome traded back into the first round. Carr and Bridgewater could have been had with first round trade downs. All of these qbs weren't elite qbs but they were good prospects that were very attainable. When you sit on your hands you can't grab. Maybe you can still scratch your derriere but you can't clutch what's out there if you sit on them. The mentality of just let's wait is the crippling mind-set that allows the Cowboys to take Dak in the fourth round when we could have had him in the third round. Instead we take a lazy DT who only adds to the immaturity level of the roster. It was rumored that Nix wanted either Cousins or Wilson with his next pick, a fourth round pick. He waited and got neither player. That's the focus of my criticism with this organization. It is a reasonable gamble to be premature taking a qb than any other position, especially for a team that doesn't have franchise qb. The fixation on player rankings doesn't equally apply to all positions. A 25-30 ranking for a qb such as Carr or Bridgewater has the potential to make a dramatic effect on a team even more so than a top 1-10 ranking of any other position. Houston is a good example of the impact of positions. Houston selected Clowny with the first pick of the draft. After some injury plagued years he has turned it around to become a dynamic defensive player. If you gave Houston the choice of selecting either the top rated Clowny or instead had the choice to select the lower rated qb in Carr which player would they now prefer? The obvious answer is the qb. I'm not naive to believe that getting a top tier qb is easy. But not pursuing a good prospect because you are waiting to be in position to draft an elite qb prospect is like waiting at the bus stop at night when the buses are no longer running. There were a number of opportunities for us to acquire legitimate prospects. We didn't act. Just because there are no guarantees (same reasoning applies to all positions) that doesn't mean we should take a pass. If you have a good qb and a flawed roster you can still compete at a high level. If you have a limited qb and a sterling roster you get nowhere. That's the point!

If you are going to take a risk or increase your odds it makes sense to do it for the qb position. The Bills had more than enough opportunities to select good prospects but passed for players, good or bad, that in the end are of no consequence to its standing. Russell Wilson was graded high in all attributes associated with his position except height. Country Buddy Nix moved up in the third round to select a track receiver who was a marginal player. He could have selected Wilson or Cousins with that pick. Derek Carr and Bridgewater could have been had with a first round trade down that would add additional pick/s to sweeten the deal. My point is basic: with a little more urgency and resolve to find a legitimate qb it could have been accomplished. Let's put things in perspective here. The Bills have not had a franchise qb for a generation. It's not surprising in that same generation the Bills have not participated in the playoffs. There is no debate as to how important that position is to having success in the league. What makes our franchise so out of touch is that it is stunningly oblivious to what is so obvious to everyone else: Success is mostly predicated on the caliber of your starting qb. You can't judge how foolish our franchise is by looking at how it is addressing that position from a year to year basis. The way to gauge their inexplicable foolishness is to take a block of five and ten years and ask yourself how much did we upgrade that position during that long stretch of time? Are you laughing or crying? The argument that frequently is made is that this is not a good qb draft year. When that same argument is made for a decade it becomes a ludicrous argument to make. Even when there are elite prospects that doesn't mean that your 8-8 mediocre team will be in position to select that prospect. That calls for repeated attempts in so called good or bad draft years. My stance is dramatically different from yours. Until a franchise qb is ensconced on our roster the pursuit of a qb should be a priority. Quibbling over who is the best CB or S should be secondary to securing a qb. When the cycle of failure repeats itself for a generation don't you think it is time to change your orientation and priorities on how to build a successful franchise?

The GM for Atlanta (former Patriot staffer) did a good job in fortifying the OL. The Mack pickup was a terrific addition. I thought Levitre retired after he left Tennessee. Goes to show you that smart low profile pickups can solidify a roster and make a difference. I'm happy for the both of them. As I said in another post I'm sad that a player and person such as Kyle Williams hasn't had the opportunity to play in a playoff game. He deserves it.

If this mock draft came to fruition I would become more agreeable. However, I don't believe that Mahomes will be there for us in the second round. That would make me go back to being disagreeable.

As much as Levitre does? They both can reminisce during the warm-ups in Houston about the good old days when they could end their season sooner and hit the beach somewhere in the Caribbean.

Your point underscores the fact that good defensemen who don't rise to the level of elite can be added to the roster to make it a sound unit. What I noticed is that when Bogo is paired with a good partner it raises his game. So I'm not giving up on him. Or another way at looking at it is that there isn't going to be much of a market for the pricey player. If the Sabres get lucky with Kulikov and he returns to health and miraculously levels out his erratic game that is another block to build with. One of my primary points in these repetitive posts of mine (I apologize for the irritation) is that there isn't a need to give up a player such as Kane to reconstitute our blue line unit. With a little patience and cap clearing the unit that is currently plaguing this team can be reconstituted to being a capable unit.

I disagree with your view comparing Goodwin with Hogan if he was with the Pats. A receiver in the Pats system and playing with Brady has to run precise routes and be able to adjust his routes in their system. That certainly isn't Goodwin's forte.

Check the Pats roster. There are many contributing players who were let go or picked-up for a pittance. The Pats picked him up after we weren't willing to pay a little more for him and they were.

Being a receiver on the Pats is not such an easy task that you can pluck any decent receiver in. You have to be able to run precise routes and you have to be able to make the adjustments that the qb expects. You can knock Hogan and diminish his production if you want but being able to be incorporated into that offense would be a challenge for many good receivers. The Pats are not your typical team that can be ranked by stats. They adjust their game plans on offense and defense on a weekly basis. You can be a forgotten receiver for some games and then be the prominent receiver in other games. Being able to adapt and be flexible is an important trait that a lot of players are incapable of . The Bills possess a lot of talented dumb players that Belichick would have no interest in because they lack the mental wherewithal to grasp the changing concepts. Make no mistake what I'm saying here. Hogan is a solid player but nothing special. However, he was a good fit in New England. That's the central point. Belichick gets low cost discarded pieces from other teams and puts those low cost players in a position to succeed. They should be admired for their innovative thinking and approach to the game. Their record speaks for itself; our record speaks for itself.

Let's look at what our options are on the blue line . Guhle will definitely be a good addition. I'm certainly not a devotee of Kulikov but either he is not re-signed and money is save with his departure or he stabilizes as a player when healthy and plays reasonably well. Murray had to have seen something in his game to make a deal for him. A number of players' contracts will be shed affording us the ability to pick up some good (not top tier) defensemen who could shore up that unit. Is Bogo a lost cause? Not necessarily. When he is paired with a good player his play is elevated. And let's not forget McCabe who is emerging as a good player. There is this mistaken notion that unless your backline is staffed by all-star caliber of players the unit can't capably function. That isn't how I see it. The Sabres can add another couple of good to solid d-men and make that unit change from being a major liability to being a good unit. As you indirectly alluded to we have some young emerging players who in the not too distant future will need to be compensated with rich contracts. Instead of adding a cap busting elite defenseman it would be better to spread the resources for a couple of good defensemen. It's about balancing out the contracts as much as the talent. My recommendation is the same as before. Don't panic. Ride it out and then be judicious when the market has players to offer.

What you are basically saying is that his talents were maximized on another team. He was running different routes all over the field, something he would not have been doing too much in Buffalo. The Bills emphasize a running game in conjunction with a rather primitive passing game. Just as with Watkins and Clay the receiver's talents were under-utilized because of the limitations of the qb he was playing with here. That's the point and that is the problem.

Usually as the trade deadline approaches the standard hockey cycle is non-playoff team shedding veteran players to playoff teams and teams making a push for the playoffs for picks that are not too high. Toronto was able to maximize their return because they had some high salaried talented players that were good enough to make a difference for teams. Kessler fell in that category. The Kessler deal for the Penquins paid off because he was a factor in their cup run. The Sabres have a number of similar type players that maybe can be parlayed in a deal. Foligno, Carrier and Bailey are similar in that they are big, fast skaters and play hard. What is that going to get you in return? Not much because although they are contributors they are replaceable. As I said a in prior post my preference is stay the course and wait for the market to open up when teams are cap strapped. Bonanza trades usually end up filling a hole by creating another hole. Organizations that have an excess of talent down on the farm and have accumulated picks are better positioned to make the big deals. Our farm talent has been depleted so we have less to draw from.

Was the X-Files your favorite TV show and movie?

Maybe the receivers aren't taught properly how to wave their arms adequately enough?