GG Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 10 hours ago, JohnC said: We are going in circles. I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your general perspective. We will have to agree to disagree and move on. I say this with no rancor. The cap was a factor but not the biggest factor. He wanted to reshape the roster and cap structure. Last year, I was asked by an exasperated K-9 when I thought this team would be a more serious team. I said between two and three years (starting from last year). I hold to that schedule. This is a critical offseason where he needs to add some talent to fill some critical needs. If he doesn't accomplish that he will be replaced. I think the point people are trying to make is that Botts should not be the person who should architect the rebuild. The evidence surely backs his critics. The cap dilemma is a false hope, because he won't have enough cap room to build a contending team through free agency only. He may swing for one top tier FA, if one is even available, but the rest of the new Sabres have to be fillers on $1mil-$2mil contracts. What gives everyone agita about the situation is that in three years, Botts is basically batting 0% in getting quality contributions from the low-mid tier offensive guys that he's brought in or extended. What makes you confident that in year 4, the light will turn on? 3
4merper4mer Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 14 minutes ago, GG said: I think the point people are trying to make is that Botts should not be the person who should architect the rebuild. The evidence surely backs his critics. The cap dilemma is a false hope, because he won't have enough cap room to build a contending team through free agency only. He may swing for one top tier FA, if one is even available, but the rest of the new Sabres have to be fillers on $1mil-$2mil contracts. What gives everyone agita about the situation is that in three years, Botts is basically batting 0% in getting quality contributions from the low-mid tier offensive guys that he's brought in or extended. What makes you confident that in year 4, the light will turn on? Bingo
May Day 10 Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 Yes, that is exactly the case. The Sabres are who they are. There isnt some giant reset button that gets pressed if a new GM is brought in. In fact, they could flesh that out in an interview and figure out who has the best plan and attitude for the short and medium term. Their cap is already blown for the most part as far as high end players. They have Eichel's $10 Million and Skinner's $9 Million (barf) until 2026. Dahlin is going to command the same neighborhood. Reinhart is probably going to demand a long term deal in the neighborhood of $7 Million. Olafsson will also get a nice jump. I do believe Okposo's contract buyout is palatable after this season. The only high end player out there is Taylor Hall. Someone(s) are going to offer contracts that exceed his worth, and likely there will need to be a Buffalo 'premium' (Im sure he is itching to jump into Edmonton-east). There is flexibility to fill out the middle and lower end of the roster, but I am not sure where they are going to get the talent. Teams arent just giving away players who are good (unless you are Botterill trading OReilly who is precisely who they need). Botterill has failed miserably in identifying middle to low-tier players. He has cycled through them (often burning draft picks in doing so) at a rapid rate. The pipeline/futures is worse off than it was when Botterill arrived. I cannot name more than one or 2 things he has done well (Nylander trade?). Foremost though, Botterill portrays the alignment of a loser and a losing organization, as does Kruger's strange six-sigma shtick. I am so sick and tired of hearing about 'learning', 'growth paths', 'in position to be in games', 'goal is meaningful games in March' (failed), 'challenging each other with ideas' etc. The bar is set so impossibly low by these people. There needs to be some urgency and a lot of expectation of success. Losing is unacceptable and should be that way. Im sick of hearing people try to justify losses as some sort of moral victories because the Sabres were "close" (hint: all 95% of hockey games are close). We are celebrating because they gave Colorado a 'good game'? When Botterill took over, Colorado finished with 48 points and awful, and the Sabres had 78 points (about as many as they will end up with this season). Rocket surgery. Players love Kruger because he puts no pressure on them. Its all drum circles, espresso machines, and growth paths. Im not looking for a screamer, just some sort of priority placed on succeeding. 2 1
plenzmd1 Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 ^^^^^ @May Day 10, you nailed in brother!. It seems the expectations are so damn low in the organization it trickles down to the players.
JohnC Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 3 hours ago, GG said: I think the point people are trying to make is that Botts should not be the person who should architect the rebuild. The evidence surely backs his critics. The cap dilemma is a false hope, because he won't have enough cap room to build a contending team through free agency only. He may swing for one top tier FA, if one is even available, but the rest of the new Sabres have to be fillers on $1mil-$2mil contracts. What gives everyone agita about the situation is that in three years, Botts is basically batting 0% in getting quality contributions from the low-mid tier offensive guys that he's brought in or extended. What makes you confident that in year 4, the light will turn on? I respectfully disagree with the general thesis of your response. That is not to say that it isn't an excellent and well reasoned response. In my opinion where you are wrong in your thesis is that I don't believe that the large cap space is going to be used for a top tier free agent. That is very unlikely. What I do believe is that our GM is in a good position to trade a player like Risto and/or Montour who have value and in return get a second line player or two who will be a relatively high cost player. Another point where I disagree with you and others is that the mid-tier free agents that he has brought in such as Vesey and Johansson are not failed players. They are simply players who are playing on lines above their talent level because there is currently a lack of talent and depth on the roster necessitating them to fill a void. The area that needs critical attention this offseason is the second line. Right now the only second line caliber forward is Skinner. And it is undeniable that his goal scoring talents are being severely diminished because the players he is playing with are not good enough to maximize his talents. That's what happens when there is a dearth of talent. Players end up playing on a line or defensive pairing above their talent level. As an example, although Scandella received a lot of unfair criticisms from the harsh critics here as a third pairing defenseman he was a solid player. As a first or second pairing player he is inadequate. That same line of reasoning applies to a player such as Vesey. He is a third or fourth line caliber of player. He playing on the first line with Jack is an absurdity. But it is understandable why the erudite coach put him on the higher line. It was due to injuries on a team that already was thin. I would have put Skinner on the first line when Olofsson got hurt but the coach for a variety of reasons declined to move him up to that line. If you take an overview of this season most of us can agree that our goaltending has been mediocre this season. If we would have had the cleaned up and restored Lehner who played at level he played with the Islanders or the Blackhawks is there any doubt that his team wouldn't have earned between 8 to 10 more points? In my estimation the biggest mistake that the owner could make is fire the current GM. This organization needs more continuity and stability, not less. This organizational lurching back and forth is not a solution as much as they are are acts of frustration. My recommendation is to allow him to do his job this offseason and next season and then make a determination whether to keep him or not. This was never a quick fix project. And that is the reality that a lot of exasperated and frustrated fans have difficulty facing. Again, I appreciate your well thought out response but I respectfully disagree with it.
May Day 10 Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 They acquired scandella to be a top 4 defenseman If they made that trade, accepted the pominville salary dump, and paid scandella $4 million per year to be a 5th to 7th defenseman, Botterill should be turfed on principle. 1
JohnC Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 The attached link is a column by Ryan Kennedy of the Hockey News. This link was taken from the SI site. He offers some recommendations on how to improve the team next year. This is a relatively short article. His primary suggestions address the penalty kill struggles and goaltending. https://www.si.com/nhl/2020/03/03/how-to-fix-the-buffalo-sabres
BillsVet Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 4 hours ago, May Day 10 said: Foremost though, Botterill portrays the alignment of a loser and a losing organization, as does Kruger's strange six-sigma shtick. I am so sick and tired of hearing about 'learning', 'growth paths', 'in position to be in games', 'goal is meaningful games in March' (failed), 'challenging each other with ideas' etc. The bar is set so impossibly low by these people. There needs to be some urgency and a lot of expectation of success. Losing is unacceptable and should be that way. Im sick of hearing people try to justify losses as some sort of moral victories because the Sabres were "close" (hint: all 95% of hockey games are close). We are celebrating because they gave Colorado a 'good game'? When Botterill took over, Colorado finished with 48 points and awful, and the Sabres had 78 points (about as many as they will end up with this season). Rocket surgery. Players love Kruger because he puts no pressure on them. Its all drum circles, espresso machines, and growth paths. Im not looking for a screamer, just some sort of priority placed on succeeding. Each time Botterill speaks publicly it sounds like a robot or doll with a string that talks. It's as if he's reading off a script or talking point memo he prepared in advance. Yet, he's been captured throwing a tantrum when the team underachieves. To me, he's replicated with the Sabres what Doug Whaley did with the Bills. He's made some decent trades (Skinner, Jokiharju) but spent big dollars and isolated Buffalo into a cap position that is untenable. And the results are completely mediocre. His record in the draft necessitates signing UFAs and there's little organizational depth. The organization needs an overhaul because what we're watching is the best Botterill can do. I would love to believe the Pegula's cut their losses, but their sense of urgency isn't there.
Jauronimo Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 3 hours ago, BillsVet said: Each time Botterill speaks publicly it sounds like a robot or doll with a string that talks. It's as if he's reading off a script or talking point memo he prepared in advance. Yet, he's been captured throwing a tantrum when the team underachieves. To me, he's replicated with the Sabres what Doug Whaley did with the Bills. He's made some decent trades (Skinner, Jokiharju) but spent big dollars and isolated Buffalo into a cap position that is untenable. And the results are completely mediocre. His record in the draft necessitates signing UFAs and there's little organizational depth. The organization needs an overhaul because what we're watching is the best Botterill can do. I would love to believe the Pegula's cut their losses, but their sense of urgency isn't there. I'd say it far more closely resembles what Beane and McDermott did. Completely turned over the roster, traded all the malcontents, voluntarily put the team in cap hell, brought in their own guys, and traded draft picks for assets. Much like during the early days of McBeane we hear that the cap hell we are in was inevitable, the sins of past regime. Etc. The big difference is Botts guys and Botts picks haven't panned out. If Josh Allen didn't look like he could be the man and our defense wasn't playing lights out it would be the same story with the Bills.
GG Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 46 minutes ago, Jauronimo said: The big difference is Botts guys and Botts picks haven't panned out. If Josh Allen didn't look like he could be the man and our defense wasn't playing lights out it would be the same story with the Bills. Wouldn't you say that's a pretty important factor that differentiates good GMs from bad? 1
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 Isn't Terry a self proclaimed hockey guy? He seems like a better football owner.
Beast Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 10 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said: Isn't Terry a self proclaimed hockey guy? He seems like a better football owner. I think he is a good owner for both, to be quite honest. The problem is he just hasn’t had any luck. I think most believed that when he hired Tim Murray the Sabres were on their way.......then Botterill was a “cap guru” from a great organization. The next up and comer. Just some bad luck but I’d argue the bad decisions have been bad looking back on them and not when they were made. 1
Lurker Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 19 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said: Isn't Terry a self proclaimed hockey guy? He seems like a better football owner. What in the hell does that mean? Pegs is a hockey fan. That makes him no more expert than any message board poster... 1
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 3, 2020 Posted March 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Lurker said: What in the hell does that mean? Pegs is a hockey fan. That makes him no more expert than any message board poster... Easy, killer. 1
BillsFan4 Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 https://nhl.nbcsports.com/2020/03/03/nhl-gms-propose-slight-change-to-offside-rule-that-might-help-goal-reviews/ Quote Note that this proposal needs to go through a few layers before the change is complete. It needs to be approved by the NHL’s Board of Governors and Competition Committee for this tweak to happen. “When we met with our breakout group [Monday], the group thought that it was tough watching a game, especially with our skilled players, when we see a nice goal being scored and there’s a delay and there’s a challenge and we’re taking down good hockey goals because the guy’s toe is slightly off the ice or he’s in a crossing over motion where the majority of his body is still in the neutral zone but his skate is not touching the ice,” NHL senior vice president of hockey operations Kris King said via NHL.com. “They felt a lot of times the guy that is offside isn’t even involved in the rush. They just felt the skate in the air really didn’t have a lot of bearing on any of these goals.”
shrader Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 13 hours ago, BillsFan4 said: https://nhl.nbcsports.com/2020/03/03/nhl-gms-propose-slight-change-to-offside-rule-that-might-help-goal-reviews/ I think it's a dumb change but I understand why they're doing it. They opened the door to trouble with the replay rule, but rather than fix that, they're just going to change other rules.
Lurker Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 On 3/3/2020 at 8:02 AM, GG said: I think the point people are trying to make is that Botts should not be the person who should architect the rebuild. The evidence surely backs his critics. The cap dilemma is a false hope, because he won't have enough cap room to build a contending team through free agency only. He may swing for one top tier FA, if one is even available, but the rest of the new Sabres have to be fillers on $1mil-$2mil contracts. What gives everyone agita about the situation is that in three years, Botts is basically batting 0% in getting quality contributions from the low-mid tier offensive guys that he's brought in or extended. What makes you confident that in year 4, the light will turn on? This post essentially captures my thoughts on Botts as well. He doesn't appear to have the slightest talent for spotting NHL-level talent. Batting 0% is maybe too kind--I'd put his hit rate in the negative category as there seems to be no over-arching team concept in any of his acquisitions. Still, at the heart of everything hanging over the team is the stench left by Tim Murray's reign. A new coat of paint and some re-arrangement of the deck chairs has been nowhere near enough to overcome the after effects of that debacle...
shrader Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 14 minutes ago, Lurker said: This post essentially captures my thoughts on Botts as well. He doesn't appear to have the slightest talent for spotting NHL-level talent. Batting 0% is maybe too kind--I'd put his hit rate in the negative category as there seems to be no over-arching team concept in any of his acquisitions. Still, at the heart of everything hanging over the team is the stench left by Tim Murray's reign. A new coat of paint and some re-arrangement of the deck chairs has been nowhere near enough to overcome the after effects of that debacle... I wouldn't say no eye for NHL talent. He can spot it on the blue line. He's the bizarro Murray in that regard, all D, no F. Honestly though, I think the team is left in a better spot moving forward with that approach than with Murray's. The next GM is going to have an easier time moving forward with the cap space and a solid blue line foundation.
May Day 10 Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 What defensemen has he spotted? He traded a mid level prospect and a 1st for Montour who was panned by the analytics crowd and he has been disappointing. Gave up multiple picks for Miller who has been a healthy scratch at times this year and hasnt been good. Scandella, Beaulieu, Hunwick, Tennyson, Antipin? Jokiharyu has been OK I guess. Pilut is still an unknown prospect and basically a Guhle replacement. Dahlin was a slam dunk pick, my dog could have made that selection. They have a few OK prospects I guess on the blueline in Johnson and Samuelsson, but very raw and young and who knows how they turn out. Defensemen also typically take a longer time to reach full development. We won't know on those guys for like 3+ more years
Recommended Posts