JohnC

If the Sabres are going after a player such as Vesey it tells you that the GM is determined to get more production out of the third and fourth lines. Gergs and Larrsson are gritty defensive players. Scoring wise they are impotent. I don't think one of them or maybe even both of them will be on next year's roster.

I doubt that any of the top tier free agents have an interest in Buffalo. But that isn't the only restraint. You can't consider expensive long terms contracts without factoring in how it will foreclose your contract options with your own best players. In the not too distant future Reinhart's contract will have to be addressed, and a little farther down the line Dahlin is going to be in position to earn a maximum contract. What I see happening is intermediate deals such as the Flyer and Capital defenseman swap materializing because teams will have no choice but to move out bigger contracts and better players to stay within the cap and apply the saved money to sign players who are already on the team. That's what happened in the Washington deal. The reality is that most often player decisions revolve around the financial puzzle that needs to be smartly assembled.

The below link is a mock draft. What is starting to crystalize is that when you review the mock drafts the same names and general rankings come up. We should come away with a good player who could be ready in a couple of years. I don't envision the GM trading his high first round but I can envision him dealing off his low first round pick in a deal to get player ready to play next season. https://www.diebytheblade.com/2019/4/17/18411210/very-early-2019-nhl-mock-draft-buffalo-sabres-jack-hughes-kaapo-kakko

We have a difference in opinion that won't be reconciled. I do believe in decorum. In my view certain behavior may be appropriate in one setting but not necessarily in another. That adjustment to the setting and situation doesn't translate into compromising one's principles. It falls within the realm of civility. Some people believe that it is acceptable to shout down a speaker with whom you disagree with. I don't. What I find bothersome is that there is a self-centered mind-set that crimps the expression of others. You might find that liberating while I find it to be stifling. If you want to expand the circle you do it by respectfully engaging with people you disagree with. Subduing them gets you nowhere other than intensifying the passions. We just simply disagree on this issue.

If someone attends a funeral for a person who was a miserable SOB and in life conducted himself in a classless and dishonorable manner is it appropriate for someone to go to the podium at the service and state how this world has become a better place now that it is minus this asssshole? I would go so far as to say even among the attendees it would be classless to speak ill of the embalmed fool at the services. The point is that there is a time and place where what you say is appropriate and a time and place where it is not. As others have pointed out this school and system was very flawed. But highlighting those flaws instead of highlighting the efforts of most of the staff and the supportive families took away some of the joy and reasons to celebrate on this special occasions. The focus should have been on the accomplishments of the graduates who had to endure challenges that a lot of other communities are not subjected to. I'm not suggesting that the valedictorian should have been censored. This was her speech and she earned the right to be at the podium. But as I said before just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean that it is appropriate to do so. Good judgment can't always be defined. But when you see it in practice you recognize it; and when you don't see it in practice you also can recognize it.

I'm not challenging you at all about the level of corruption and incompetence that exists in that school system. Those problems represent ingrained political and school corruption. The best way to challenge those problems is through the legal, political system and sustained media attention.

Darren Dreger is well plugged into the league and the individual franchises. Whenever he talks about rumors my ears perk up because they originate from sources closely associated with the teams. I never really worried about the outcome of the Skinner negotiations because all along he said that the parties were always in touch and there was little posturing from either side. As described by Skinner that is an accurate description of the negotiations. I don't know what deals that Botts is working on. If Dreger points out that the Sabres are focusing on dealing with a particular team/s over particular players then I am inclined to give his comments much credibility.

I have no clue what you are getting at? The school could be an academic powerhouse or an academic jungle. That isn't the issue for me. There is a time and place to address problems. This stage was not the right place and time to make those snarky remarks.

The below link is a WGR 13 minute segment with Darren Dreger on the Instigators. My sense is that the Sabres will be making some medium type deals and no costly blockbuster deals. Plezmd1 will be unhappy at that approach while I will be pleased. https://wgr550.radio.com/media/audio-channel/06-14-tsns-darren-dreger-instigators

If a teacher or employee is an alcoholic and it is affecting one's job there are ways to address the issue. Parents and students have the right to go to the school authorities to address the problem, and if the response is not satisfactory then take the complaint to higher authorities inside and outside the system. What was the point of bringing up this issue at the podium for a valedictorian speech? School is over with for this class. My point in my first post is that there is a time and place for everything. I just think poor judgment was exhibited here.

There is a time and a place to point out the inequities and challenges that students have to contend with. Instead of publicly singling out the less than diligent and supportive staff she should have focused more on those staff who supported the students through their challenging journey. This was a time to be uplifting and positive. Her speech is receiving notoriety not for publicly thanking those who were helpful but because of her remarks about those who were not supportive. The valedictorian can say whatever she wants to say. It's her speech. But the end result is that her last appearance at the school is going to be remembered more for her negative comments than her positive comments. Just because one has a right to say something doesn't mean that it is the proper thing to do in a certain setting. The lesson is that although good judgment may not garner the same attention of bad judgment it is the more right thing to do. This valedictorian should be proud of her accomplishment. However, she had the honor of speaking on behalf of her class and made it a controversial speech when it didn't need to be. Good judgment and class are sometimes not easy to define. But when it is not exhibited you do notice it.

It's not going to happen. If you are miserable now you are going to be miserable later. I have no doubt that there are going to be additions to this roster. But there won't be any blockbuster deals (my opinion) such as the acquisition of Matt Duchene for a max or near max contract. There are going to be opportunities to add good players to boost this roster. Taking a PR expedient approach might make you glow for the short term but it won't take long for that sheen to fade and return you to your old pallid color. Be a little more patient. It won't kill you.

Very often trades and deals happen around the draft. Now is the time where GMs are communicating with one another trying to get a feel for what is out there and what is attainable. My sense is that Botts is not going to make any blockbuster deals but instead add a few good players instead of blowing his wad on an elite player or two. If there is a big time trade it will probably involve Risto. However, it was reported more than once that when the GM was interviewing candidates for the coaching job he asked the candidates what they would do to make Risto a better player. So I'm not sure that he wants to deal him and create another hole to fill. It's obvious that because of your unbridled impulses for volatility that you have a distaste for the GM's conservative inclination and belief in developing one's own talent. If you look back at last year Botts added Skinner, made an in-season trade for Montour and picked up Pilut on the free agent market. If he can similarly add three or four good players and get improved play from some of the young players (Oloffsson, Nylander, Pilut, CJ Smith, Borgen, Dahlin and others) and with better coaching this team should be better. It's not sexy but it is the right course to take.

If one had a choice between Mahomes and Watson and selected the wrong one you still end up selecting the right one. Getting one of them is better than not getting any one of them.

I believe that the organization did upgrade the OL, receiving unit and also the backfield. Is that a guarantee? No. On the other hand you can't absolutely say for sure that the numerous moves to upgrade the offense won't work out as intended. We can yin and yang this issue with no immediate conclusion. This issue should be determined one way or another in the not too distant future. What it comes down to is some people look up while other look down. We shall see.

You should never publicly agree with me. It brings into question your judgment. I made this point in another post so I apologize for the repetition: I don't recall one player questioning the trade or defending the player. It was recently reported that the GM was aggressively working to get him dealt. It's obvious to me that more was going on behind the scenes that made this trade a necessity, or at least made the organization feel that he had to be moved.

As you pointed out Josh didn't have the offensive support that those two young and impressive qbs had last year or even the prior year. What is encouraging is that this offseason was dedicated to putting him in a position to succeed by bringing in line help, receiving help and running back help. McDermott decided that in his first year he wasn't going to draft a qb with his first round pick. One can disagree with his decision but there were reasons for it. Debating whether he should have done so in his first year is understandable but futile because he didn't. What makes that issue less shadowing this franchise is that he addressed the qb issue the next year. From what I saw with his play last year I, like you, am optimistic about him being our long-term franchise qb.

It's understandable why ROR was frustrated and wanted out. He got tired of the losing and felt that he was stuck in a situation that wasn't going to soon change. But that's not to say that he didn't contribute in forcing his way out of town. What was apparent to his teammates and to the organization that his level of play and preparation noticeably declined. This malaise in play and attitude was going on for more than a short time. When ROR was traded to Buffalo and signed a near max contract he signed with a team that he knew was undertaking a major rebuild. He signed a long-term deal with a team that was still quite away from being a good team. So there should be no surprise what he was going to experience. There are plenty of players in this league who play for bad teams and organizations who continue to give consistent effort. So the situation he was in was not so unusual. What bothers me the most about this situation is his on and off the ice dropoff. That lack of commitment that he deliberately exhibited created a situation where he needed to be moved. Without question the Sabres front office has not acted competently for quite awhile. But even acknowledging the obvious doesn't make ROR's behavior very admirable.

We outsiders don't know if the bonus money consideration affected his value on the market. On the other hand what we do now know is that he was being shopped. A factor in diminishing his value was that he wasn't playing at the same level he was in his first year. And it probably wasn't a secret around the league that he wanted out and the organization also wanted him out. So the selling team didn't have the usual leverage that it would normally have dealing a talented player without such tarnishing issues. As it stands this is an imbalanced deal. That's life. Sometimes you are on the winning side of a deal and sometimes you are not. It's now up to the GM to make some smart deals this offseason that will close the gaping gap from this deal. The old school can be tough and bloody in meting out discipline for inappropriate conduct.

If you look at what was being offered by Montreal and St. Louis, the two teams most interested in acquiring a second line center from the market, the offerings were not very impressive considering the caliber of player being shopped. No organization is going to take on a player with a big contract without researching the player and the situation involving the player. Tapes don't lie. It was well known before the local fans were aware that this player was being shopped. So his play was being highly scrutinized by the potential suitors. If ROR was playing at his usual level of play he would have garnered richer offers. That wasn't the case here. In fact, St. Louis made it clear that their top two or three prospects were untouchable in any deal. That's why Tage was offered and not the more highly ranked prospects in their system. So what does that tell you? They weren't going to give up a high end prospect for a player who wasn't playing up his usual standard. They weren't willing to take on that risk. Although it is apparent that as it stands the Sabres got pummeled in this deal that doesn't mean that the calculations should be stopped. If Tage becomes a productive third line player and productive goal scorer and the lower first round pick we got in the trade is parlayed in a deal for a second line player than this deal in the longer term won't look so imbalanced. Anyone who has been in the workforce for a long time recognizes that there are circumstances where a talent in the group has to be dispatched in order to make the rest of the unit function as a better group. It's not an easy decision for the boss to make but it is a necessary decision that needs to be made. Don't get carried away and do the jig at their misery. You might hurt your knee and set back your rehab.

What is surprising about the ROR situation, before and after the trade, is that not much has been revealed to what was going on in the room. Paul Hamilton who follows the team for WGR rarely says anything negative about player from a character standpoint. He is not reluctant to criticize players for their play but not malicious about the players as individuals. The one player he was willing to criticize beyond the play was ROR. He stated on more than a few occasions that he got tired of his "the burden is on me" and "I got to do better" act. I'm not out to malign this guy. He was on the team that won the cup and he was an instrumental player. Congratulations for him. But he having success with the Blues doesn't mean that moving him wasn't the right thing to do. As I said before the GM has to make some moves this offseason to mitigate the loss resulting from that deal. That would be the best response. Who?

Gugny, the more you post the more you reveal that you have freakish tendencies. That's not to say that there is anything wrong with that as long as you are comfortable in your own skin and soiled bedcovers.

Mark Messier was a genuine tough guy. What gave him credibility is not his words or menacing stare but his fanatical effort. No one on the ice was going to play harder. His passion was real. However, there are different styles of leadership. All of them revolve around authenticity. You can't be someone you are not. A player like Skinner shows leadership not through verbal fluidity but through effort in preparation and in the games. The sports world in every sport is a small world. There are few secrets. Having sex with a teammates wife or significant other is fraught with danger and complexity. The link below is about the infamous NY Yankee wife swap that at the time caused a public sensation but was well known by the baseball world before it became public. https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/original-wife-swap-yankee-pitchers-trade-lives-article-1.2138703

In hockey more than most sports the "mix" in the room is very important. It's has to be remembered that ROR was a captain and a core player. When an organization invests in a player like him and the player is not invested in the team then that is not a simple problem but a festering problem that needs to be addressed. The best way to deal with the fallout of the void created by his departure is to act as quickly to fill the void. This is going to be an important offseason for the GM to address some of the roster needs.

I've read and heard radio reports that the GM was determined to trade him. So that tells you that the situation was untenable. It was also reported that another team that was interested in him was Montreal who also needed a second line center. Apparently the return in each case was not so overwhelming. I have not and will not be critical of the trade because obviously the GM felt compelled that the locker room needed to be altered. What is noticeable about this deal is that I don't recall any players making any statements on or off the record criticizing the organization for this trade.