JohnC

Are there any lower tier cap cuts on the market that can at least be a functional RT? The Kujo draft selection was very damaging. The Skins drafted Morgan Moses out of Virginia with a lower round pick, I think it was the third round. It took a season or two for him to get his footing but he is now an established right tackle. The problem with our RT position last year and to an extent our RG position is that the play was not only less than mediocre, it was a liability/vulnerability. Teams can manage areas of weaknesses in a variety of ways but when it descends to the point of being a liability there is little one can do to plug the hole. I'm hoping that Miller can step up with an offseason to work on his game but I'm not confident in Henderson being adequate enough. Kujo should simply be cut.

I need to take more time to digest your comment before regurgitating a response.

The son has been with his father in the locker room full time for years. LaRoche had him by his side when he was with Washington. In Washington there were no outward problems with the arrangement. Bryce Harper loved the kid like he was his little brother. I don't think that Chicago's GM was being unreasonable when he told the player that although his son would be allowed in the locker room that it wouldn't be allowed all the time. Personally, I think this arrangement is a little unhealthy for the kid in that his interactions with people outside of baseball were somewhat limited. I think it would have been a healthier situation for him if he associated more with kids his age. I'm not referring to the home schooling aspect of the situation. Even in a home schooling situation kids have a greater opportunity to interact with each other. If Adam LaRouche felt that he couldn't compromise in this matter then he exercised his prerogative by walking away from the game and the paychecks. I'm not sure that he is sending the right implicit message to his son by essentially saying that if you aren't allowed to completely control your work environment then you should walk away. But ultimately he is the father and he has a right to make his own life decisions for himself and his son up to this point. What would happen if other players also wanted to bring their kids into the locker room, even to a limited extent? The situation would get out of hand to the point where the organization would have had to put a stop to the visitations by all the kids. Most often a little commons sense and courtesy would suffice. Apparently it wasn't applied here by Mr. LaRouche whose world view is a little more rigid than most others.

Evander Kane is feisty player. I have no problem with how he usually responds in a game. He is one of the first players to stand up for his teammates when he feels that they are being abused. But in this game I thought he over did it with constantly challenging players while the play was moving on. He is one of our biggest scoring threats. In a tight game from a scoring standpoint he was too often sitting in the penalty box. There is a time and place to stand one's ground. In this game I thought he over did it.

A person who is so easily perplexed should never be taken seriously.

Kaep had a profound affect on the game when he played in the early stages of his career. No one can doubt that he was a dynamo as a running qb with a cannon arm. Then the defenses adjusted to him. They stayed in their lanes and made him play more like a conventional qb. .By forcing him to make reads and pass in tighter quarters his assets of his legs and strong but erratic arm were neutralized. In this league if a qb doesn't progress in how they play their position they will predictably fade. At this point no one can say for sure whether TT will advance as a qb. Without a doubt Kaep has impressive physical skills while TT seems to much more of a refined qb (not complete) than what Kaep is and can be. My sense is that TT is more receptive to coaching and thus his prospects are much better than Kaep.

I can't digest that!

You have me befuddled? I said what I meant.

With the goalie position you just never know. One year the player can look like he is going to be a player anchoring the position for the next decade. Then the next year he turns into an erratic player who has lost his confidence. How often do teams trade for an appealing goalie to then have that player be a major disappointment? There is a finickiness to that position that the other positions don't have. Our GM scouted Lehner and was instrumental in drafting Lehner. He then traded a first round pick for him. So obviously he has a strong conviction about him. When watching him play at times you can see him make making scintillating plays. Then there are times when you can see him lose his composure and focus. To me he seems to have more upside than Johnson but Johnson seems to be more steady than the bigger goalie. The bottom line is that they make a good tandem.

Beerball is a committed environmentalist. He believes in using his own stool to fertilize the landscape around him. When he was asked what his favorite position was to relieve tension he said squatting and grunting were. He elaborated that it was a more natural and comfortable position for him than doing yoga exercises.

The organization seems intent on finding out how good Lehner is and is going to be. What has to remembered when evaluating him this year is that he is not fully healed from his high ankle sprain. It's won't completely heal until he has an offseason to rest it. I'm very glad that the organization didn't trade Johnson. He is a good safety valve goalie for us.

He was also using the port o john without a hand sanitizer . Then cooking and serving food in addition to his glad handing everyone he came in contact with.

If I ever meet Beerball and he offers to shake my hand I will respectfully decline. Also, for sanitary reasons I won't even high five him.

I remember in the beginning of the year Moulson was on the same line with Eichel. There were many occasions when Eichel would give up good shots to feed him. Eichel would have had a lot more points if he would have converted those passes, the same type of passes he converted last year. As you pointed out it has to be awkward for the both of them. Not only while they are at home but also when they are driving home after games and practices.

I agree that those two players not contributing were the difference from us not making the cut. But the reality for all teams in all sports is that the expectations entering the season rarely totally get fulfilled when the games are actually played. Last year, Ennis was one of our best players on a team that was more of an AHL caliber of team. For the few games he played this year he struggled to fit in. With respect to Moulson he simply dropped off the cliff. When I watch him play his biggest need is not additional coaching but therapy to get his positive mind-set back. I'm sad for him and empathize with the torment he seems to be going through. Is he at the end of the line? He may be for us? In my view getting a productive Ennis back next year would be a bonus. He certainly has offensive skills but you have to wonder if a change of scenery might do him some good. Overall, I agree with your assessment that the Sabres have played better than anyone should have expected. I come to my assessment not so much from the jump in points but from the eye test. The quality of play isn't just better it is a quantum leap better. The core players are not only in place but they are at an age where there is still major room for growth. Next year with a positive cap situation pieces should be added that bolster the roster in general and give it enough depth to absorb injuries.

The added dimension that Reinhart adds to the team is that he can play well with anyone on the top two lines. I understand why Bylsma wanted O'Reilly playing with Kane or another scorer but it would have been interesting to see Kane play on the same line with Eichel and Reinhart. Not only was that line productive but you could see Kane steadily getting better at integrating with that line. The Sabres should be able to improve by 20 points from last season (54 pts.). That is a major accomplishment. I remember Paul Hamilton talking about that on WGR prior to the season. At the time he felt that it was improbable because it was such a major leap forward and rarely happens. That number is now very attainable. Next year it isn't unreasonable to believe that this team should be able to improve by another 15 points or so. That should put us as a border line playoff team.

Rex can assemble the staff any way he wants. That's his prerogative as a HC. When the season is over he can't claim that he failed because his coaches and players didn't buy into his philosophy. When you hire Rex you also get the vaudeville act. No more excuses.

You have to give Nate Oats credit for doing such a terrific job. Not only is he responsible for bringing in the talent (as you so stated) but the team is also well coached. Just think if his teams do well over the next few years this mid-level college coach will be an attractive coach for a struggling upper tier program. The moral of the story: Coaches strive to go up the ladder and not down it.

The Sabres are far from being a complete team. They are still a work in progress. Instilling a responsible two way mentality is the right approach to take for the long run. If the SabreSpace fans don't consider the Kane-Eichel-Reinhart line as being exciting to watch then they are being unreasonable. I'll take a mature and cerebral Dan Bylsma over an obnoxious and bombastic Rex Ryan type coach in any circumstance and in any sport. Bull shiiiit artists don't impress me as much as people who act with maturity and competency. For me substance always trumps loud style. I can't help myself. I get pissed off just thinking about that fool!

I have a different take on players leaving programs. My feeling is if a coach can freely leave a program (sometimes a buyout is required) then a player should also have the right to leave the program when the coach that recruited him leaves. The player who left UB to join him was recruited by Hurley. If the player wants to leave he should be able to. I'm also adding the condition that if the coach departs the player should have the right to go anywhere he wants to without having to sit out. That isn't the case now but it seems unfair that a coach can leave and continue with his coaching career while the player has to sit out a year if he leaves. You can look at the situation as Hurley cherry picking a player or you can look at it as the player wanting to follow him. My bias is toward accommodating what the player wants to do. In this case he is accepting the stipulation of having to sit out a year in order to join the coach he wants to play under. As far as UB the team is not only good but well coached. They are also entertaining to watch. Virginia is one of the top teams in the country but it is excruciating to watch their brand of tough defensive ball with a too controlled offense. What salvaged the season for UB after the Hurley departure was the infusion of talent from the junior college ranks. Wouldn't it be great to see Canisius and Niagra elevate its program and then have St. Bona and UB collectively uplift the local basketball? The current coverage is almost nonexistent. That's a shame.

I've always appreciated your comments on this topic among others for your insights. With respect to the CBA the disciplinary system is tilted toward management. That's fine. I have no problem with that if it was negotiated by the parties involved. I have heard extensive commentary from both the union leader, DeMaurice Smith, and the lawyer who litigated the appeal, Kessler, both acknowledging the authority of Goodell in disciplinary matters. But they both make convincing cases that although RG has a wide latitude he still strays out of bounds when executing his authority. I have come to the conclusion a long time ago after a number of rulings that were overturned by arbitrators that he is incapable of objectively judging cases. Rather than looking at the cases as individual infractions and reviewing the facts of the cases he reviews the cases from a perspective of how he is going to be perceived. There is simply too much gut action and not enough intellectual action when he takes on a case. The irony is that due to Roger Goodell's incompetence in handling disciplinary issues he has undercut his own immense authority. Having the authority to do something doesn't give you the right to act erratically when making a determination. If a sense of reasonable fairness doesn't circumscribe the implementation of his authority then there is going to be a constant state of conflict among the parties affected. At this point there doesn't need to be any changes made to the CBA. There needs to be a greater adherence to it. It's my opinion that Roger is the one straying from the agreed upon document. Again, I respect your contribution on this issue and others. But I'm confident that the appeal judges will rule in favor of Brady. If I have to sit out the suspension period then it will at least give the wider audience a break.from my incessant commentary on this subject.

The justices' comments coming from the bench during oral arguments very often don't reveal as much as people think. The judge who made the initial ruling that the league appealed wrote a narrowly focused ruling on the process, a process that had a lot of questionable aspects to it. Your opinion is as good as any on this extended issue. However, I strongly believe that Roger Goodell is again going to be repudiated on this ridiculously handled trivial issue. You can put me on record that out of soldiarity with Brady if he serves a suspension I will stop posting while the suspension is in effect. For me this issue isn't about New England and Brady; it really is about the abuse of authority and dishonesty of the commissioner. My position has been the same since the beginning of this inflated affair. I'm steadfastly standing by my position and I'm confident in my position.

Bobby Hurley did what most coaches do in the college ranks. He climbed the ladder like almost all coaches do. He took over for Weatherspoon who did a solid job and then in short order elevated the program. UB couldn't come close to matching the money that Hurley received from Arizona State. The school he left is on a different financial tier than the school he went to. No one should fault Hurley for leaving a lower tiered program and conference for a conference with a higher national profile. It's not surprising that the young upper mobile AD who hired Hurley last year left to go to another college. The college sports business is a fiercely competitive and a merciless system. If you don't succeed and do it quickly the chorus for your firing will grow louder. My point is what Hurley and the former AD did is work within the system that everyone else is working in. They shouldn't be criticized for moving up the ranks. They did a good job while at UB, and for that they should be thanked and wished well.

Short observations about this game. Obviously the Kane-Eichel-Reinhart line is our best line. As K-9 pointed out he still needs to curtail his lone ranger style of game to be even more effective. It seems to me that since he was paired with the young guys he is making a concerted effort to work with his linemates. It helps that Eichel can keep up with him and that Reinhart is adaptable and is unifying presence on any line he plays for. I marvel at Sam's instincts and subtle style of play that elevates the players he is playing with. Bogasian is becoming more aggressive on offense. He seems lately to be getting better and playing with more confidence and less caution. McCabe is also stepping up his game. Risto, Bogasian, McCabe and Pysek make up an excellent young defensive core. If the GM is going to deal for more scorers the price will be for McCabe or Pysek. The following opinion is an opinion that irritates eball. The Sabres will be in the playoffs before the Bills will be. When you hire a self-promoting HC you don't advance your cause---you set it back. Substance trumps style.

You are off base in your interpretation of the law/s associated with assault. If you swing at someone you don't have to hit the person in order to qualify it as an assault. If the person you are involved with feels threatened then technically it qualifies as an assault. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/assault I don't believe that McCoy is going to be charged. There is a good chance that no one will be charged in this case.