JohnC

From a cap standpoint I understand your point. But if you look at all our RFAs none of them are considered costly especially considering the playing time they accrue. Other than maybe McCabe who is going to put stress on our cap? It seems to me that if a d-man is dealt it will be more due to having an excess in one area and having a need in another.

What does solidifying our fourth line have to doe with trading any of our d-men? I do agree with you that either Risto or McCabe or maybe even both are likely to be traded. But if the organization decides to stay pat with the bulging unit because the team will have both Pilut and Bogo on the shelf when the season starts then that isn't a bad situation to be in. As it stands our blue line unit as it is currently constituted is very good with Dahlin/Montour on the first pairing, Risto/McCabe on the second pairing and then Miller/Scandella/Bogo/Pilut making up the third and fourth pairing with some shuffling. That's not a bad unit.

Both of these links showed how thoughtful Granato is as a coach and his approach to the game as an instructor. For Krueger as exemplified by this coaching hire the approach is not just about individual talent development as it is about team building. There is a depth and interconnectedness about how this staff wants to put together a team. When Granato was talking about how special Mathews and Eichel are as players I thought of Nylander. Nylander may not be as explosive as these players but his skill set is elite. He will never attain a level of success as a player to match his hockey talent because he simply doesn't have the burning desire and commitment to the game that Matthews and Eichel have. I would love to be wrong but what you see when watching him is evident.

The below link is a column by Matt Larkin of The Hockey News. He was giving his opinion on the trade possibilities for Risto. I'm open on the issue but starting to lean toward keeping him unless the return is an offer that can't be refused. http://thehockeynews.com/news/article/its-time-for-buffalo-to-trade-rasmus-ristolainen-where?view=getnewpost

On a broadcast it was speculated that the Thunder will probably buy out Chris Paul. OKC will be in a major rebuild and they know that Westbrook would not want to be part of that process.

Botts got the best deal he could because he was determined to quickly move him, probably because of the impending bonus. I have never criticized him for trading the gap toothed player because it was apparent that something was going on there. The criticism I have is just because he got what he could get at the time doesn't mean that he couldn't have gotten much more by waiting for a better deal. As it turned out that imbalanced deal hurt the team. What's obvious is obvious. Compare how Botts handled the ROR case with the possible Risto or McCabe trade case? Very often patience brings you a better return than impatience.

What your post indicates is that Murray was simply not a good GM. There was little strategy and thought in constructing a roster. He tried to short circuit the rebuild process with expedient decisions that instead of advancing the rebuild set it back. He not only didn't advance the construction of a competitive team but set it back. Most of us disagree with how the current GM handled the ROR trade. (I'm sure there is more to that back story that we are aware of that includes input from the owners.) But putting aside that issue most of his moves have an understandable rationale and thoughtfulness behind them. You and Bills4 point out that Murray didn't value the defense compared to the rest of the roster. But what is also evident is that he still wasn't very successful in constructing the forward lines. With Murray style trumped substance. His bluster and tough talk didn't compensate for his inability to handle the many responsibilities associated with his GM job. When all is said and done the bland and boring Botts outshined the more colorful, loud and pugnacious personality of Murray. Or another way of saying it is : Substance over style.

I am going to do something that doesn't happen very often here. I'm going to defend Murray on the Nylander pick. At the time both Nylander and Sergachev were highly rated prospects regardless of the positions they played. If Nylander would have panned out and become a genuine second line forward no one would complain of the pick. In hindsight, the mistake that was made was in the evaluation of the player and not the consideration of the importance of their positions. When you draft 17 year old prospects you are making big projections. Nylander's skill set was impressive and evident even at his young age. He came from a family of accomplished NHL players. So his selection was more than reasonable. The issues that so far have undermined his development are attributes such as effort, maturity and work ethic that are difficult to measure on players who don't even shave yet. My point is simply that although this pick didn't work out for us it wasn't a bad or unreasonable pick. Maybe a change of scenario will help him to get back on track? However, I wouldn't bet on it. I'm more confident that in time Mittelstadt who was drafted in the same range will develop into a good NHL player because he has a much more mature attitude toward his profession than the traded player.

It shouldn't be forgotten that the GM used his second first round pick, Ryan Johnson, on a good skating and puck moving defenseman. This pick might be ready at least a couple to three years down the road. Adding to the stable of young defensemen is Borgen who might be ready for some play this year and more established play in a couple of years. In addition, Pilut, when he gets healthy, should be a third pairing player this season. As you noted the GM is making the defensive unit a priority. The pipeline is flowing.

Let me start off with the easy question. The two goalies on the roster will be carrying the load with Hutton being the primary goalie and Ullmark the secondary goalie. If I had to guess what the ratio of playing time will be I would say Hutton playing two games to Ullmark's one. I would rate our goaltending as average to solid. Hopefully, a better defensive structure from the defensemen and lines should help out the goalies. With respect to the issue of Risto being traded the answer is I don't know. What I do know is that if he is traded the deal won't be modeled after the devastating ROR trade that gruesomely damaged this team. Because of that painful lesson the GM won't deal Risto unless the return is significant. Don't be surprised if McCabe turns out to be the defenseman who gets traded and Risto stays. I don't believe that Botts is done dealing. It must be remembered that the Skinner deal was done in August. There are a number of teams that are cap stressed and have to contend with signing some of their better players. So my expectation is that there should be at least two deals on the table before this team goes to camp. Overall, the Sabres are in a better situation than before the deals. But everything is relative. Other teams in our conference such as New Jersey, Florida, Montreal, New York and Carolina have also made moves to upgrade their rosters. The team to watch is Florida. They hired one of the best coaches in the game in Quinneville, and they added an elite goal tender to their young and talented roster. In general, I'm pleased with what the GM has done this offseason. He didn't act out of desperation by making some big splash deals but instead made a number of good value deals that will help us in the short term and not debilitate us for the long term. He has acted smartly and economically.

I get on his nerves. I draw satisfaction from his irritation. It's surprising to me that he didn't post another one of his daily ritual screeds about Housley after having his high brow expresso this morning before tanning himself on the California beach. It is rumored that he was cited by the beach police for indecent exposure because he was wearing a skimpy speedo. I'm sure Plezmd would be surprised to learn that Arizona quickly hired him after he was fired.

One of the major liabilities of a finesse and skill type player like Nylander is that if he isn't on one of the top two lines then he won't be able to fit on the lower third and fourth lines where more physicality is required. It's not unusual for upcoming players to be brought up and start off on the lower lines, and then work themselves up to the two higher lines. That process is not going to work with Nylander. I wish him well and hope Chicago is a good place for him. But I still see him facing the same obstacles there that he had here.

Plenz is a tough nut to get through to. When his hemorrhoids are on fire he blames Housley for the painful eruption. Although he may seem incorrigible I will not give up on him. Although at times I have the desire to strangle him it doesn't mean that I will quit on him. I'm confident that he will eventually come around. It may not happen in my life time but there is still a scintilla of hope. If K-9 continues to enable him he will never reform!

I don't watch many Amerk games but I do watch the highlights from their games from their web site. I have also heard many interviews of Chris Taylor, the HC, discussing Nylander. The description of his play rarely changes. Nylander is described as a skilled and finesse player. Taylor has often said that he and his staff assiduously work to get him to play a more two way game and a harder physical game on the boards and in his zone. When the description of his style of play hasn't changed much over the past couple of years then it becomes obvious (at least to me) that he is either incapable of rounding out his game or he doesn't have the desire to. I have seen him in a few Sabre games. For the most part he is an invisible and no impact player with some interludes of skill. But what is evident to the observer is that his game lacks consistent energy. I have a standard way of evaluating players: Trust your eyes and not your hope.

Thank you for your foolishness. I appreciate you subsidizing my viewership. I, like you, hate making the call. But I have not had a bad experience. One time I dealt with someone who was unyielding. I called back later and got someone who was much more receptive. What I find is that going directly to the retention department saves some time and unnecessary quibbling.

This is a deal in which each player needed a change of scenery. Nylander seemed to be a player who in short stints would tantalize you with his impressive skill set. But what you never got from his is consistent intensity. He would often fade away and become invisible and then make a play that would tease you. As you noted he seemed to be primarily a perimeter player and not possess enough grinding traits that are required to succeed in the league. I'm hoping that a change of scenery will invigorate both of these players.

Bogo is not in the long term plans and neither is Scandella. Hunwick is pedestrian and it is probable that either McCabe (more likely) or Risto will be dealt. So the unit is being reshaped. As you noted it wouldn't be surprising that a deal is being formulated involving either McCabe or Risto that will bolster the second line. If Risto is involved in a deal then it will be a big deal. If McCabe is involved in a deal it won't be so significant. There are some teams out there that are cap stressed and will be forced to move some talent in order to re-sign some of their bigger talents. This offseason has been interesting and is getting more interesting.

The more I listen to opinions about Risto from those in the business the more inclined I am to keeping him. The Sabres were a low rung team last year with a lot of deficiencies. Not all of them are going to be addressed in one offseason. The hope or the gamble is that Mittelstadt and Johanssom can fill that role, at least in the near term. If the Sabres depart with Risto to address the center position then another hole is created with his departure. Right now my feeling is when in doubt keep the Paul Bunyan defenseman and hope that the temporary fix will be sufficient. It also has to be remembered that in the not too distant future Dylan Cozens should be ready to compete with Mittelstadt for one of the center spots.

The below attached link is a WGR interview with Brian Duff who covers the Sabres. He offers his view that Mittelstadt is going to be a linchpin player who will determine how the lines will be assembled. One of his suggestions is putting him on an upgraded second line with players who will put him in a better position to handle the second center role. He proposed a Winnipeg deal that included Risto to get players who would upgrade our second line for Mitts. This is a 15 minute segment. As I stated in prior posts I'm not willing to trade Risto unless the return is significant. No more ROR catastrophic deals! https://wgr550.radio.com/media/audio-channel/07-09-brian-duff-howard-and-nate

The more time that goes by the more idiotic that deal was. That was a damaging deal. ROR was an asset that was dealt for pennies on the dollar. If the GM at that time couldn't get an equitable return but still was determined to deal him then he should have just hung on to him until he could later get a reasonable deal.

I think that with a coach such as Krueger he is more open to working with a player to accentuate what the player does well and recognizes the player's weaknesses and avoid putting him in those problematic situations. The criticism I have of Housley is that he didn't adjust his system even when his players struggled with it. Sometimes players can be hardheaded and sometimes a coach can be hardheaded to the detriment of the team. Because of the team's history of recent struggles the Sabres have drafted near the top of the board. Reinhart, Eichel, Dahlin, Mittelstadt and Risto were highly drafted. Nylander was a high draft but there is still a question of how good will he be. The Sabres are establishing a core. The trade for Skinner added to the core. Now its up to the GM to bring in support players and put this team in a situation to compete at a high level. I don't believe that we are that far away.

I was listening to Danny Gare on WGR's The Instigator Show. He was asked about Risto and the issue of trading him. He was adamant that the Sabres should keep him. He noted that he has some business ties to the Tampa area and knew that the Lightening organization coveted him. He said he didn't want to see another talented player be dealt like in the ROR deal and thrive somewhere else. He also pointed out that the organization specifically asked every coaching candidate what they would do to make Risto a better player. Gare thought highly of Krueger as a defensive coach and felt that he was capable of getting the big defenseman to play at a high level. I'm open to the Risto trade or no trade issue. What I am not open to is trading him for less than a big haul such as an established second line center and more. The ROR deal turned out to be a boondoggle and set this franchise back. It can't happen again.

If you really believe that the team that was assembled last year was designed to win then I highly recommend a thorough eye examination. The team that the GM put together was precariously thin with only a few prime players. ROR was traded and the exchange was Sabotka, Berglund and Thompson. You take away one of the best two way players in the league, a second line center that we are now desperately trying to replace, and replace him with a bag of stale donuts what do you expect is going to happen on the ice? You want to mock Sabotka, go ahead. He was garbage as was Berglund. Their invisible performances weren't due to a coaching problem--- they were due to a talent problem. That's on the GM. When you give away one of your best players for a bag of dry manure the outcome is not too difficult to predict. Housley was far from being a good coach. But as I have repeatedly said the team's main deficiency revolved around its lack of talent. The solution is about getting better players and developing your young players. Your are wasting your time chasing the coaching bogeyman. (The notion that the coach chased ROR away is utterly ludicrous. ROR recognized that the team he was on was not good and wasn't going to be good for the foreseeable future. He wanted out. The GM should not have dealt him until he got a better exchange in a trade. That was the GM's grotesque miscue-----not the coach's.)

A Zadorov type hit periodically happens. That's part of the game. The issue is how do you respond to that type of thuggery. The only player that I recall consistently standing up for his teammates was Bogosian. In my eyes the makeup of the team was the real problem associated with their soft style of play. As you also noted the players added to the roster are tougher and more physical. Getting the right mix of players should address the issue of our players being able to better handle themselves when the game gets physical, as it inevitably does.

Casey Nelson claims that he was screened from the play and didn't witness the hit. The coached talked to him about the play and sat him out the next game. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. The Sabres were well known within the league as a soft team that could be taken advantaged of. And they were. It's not surprising that the three acquisitions this offseason are known for their gritty play. Obviously, the team softness is being addressed. http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/sabres-casey-nelson-bothered-by-response-to-hit-on-jack-eichel/