Jason Botterill Discussion Part 5
- Thread starter Buffaloed
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
K8fool
Registered User
HOW ABOUT THIS.. This year blows and we all love the sabres despite the emotional damage.. We all need deprogramming.. Peace
K8fool
Registered User
Oh ... FU MURRAY.. FU JOE BOO (big head and his dumb monsters) and sorry but fu pegs for allowing this since Berglund quit.. My sympathy for Jack and Lazar LOG Skinner oloffson and mojo .. the whole D except for you Zach.. Love okposo hat ..
I really hope for all their careers they dont quit despite fujb.. It us hard to erase a f**k it button of apathy once created.. Ill watch just to see them care and try to screw jboo w the 15th pick..
I really hope for all their careers they dont quit despite fujb.. It us hard to erase a f**k it button of apathy once created.. Ill watch just to see them care and try to screw jboo w the 15th pick..
SundherDome
I'm tired, Boss.
joshjull
Registered User
We don’t need to replace a 1C.
This offseason we don’t have a huge task ahead of us to be a better team. I just don’t have much faith in Botts to do what’s needed to make it happen.
Last edited:
You forgot the
Did I now...
Just wise arguments that have been said for years. I have been convinced by the genius of Botts.
VaporTrail
Registered User
- Mar 2, 2011
- 5,619
- 1,674
The only reason I can think of why he still has a job is that he sold some sort of long term plan to the Pegulas....because other than that there's no logical reason why he's still here...if that is the case, then we just may be stuck with Botterill for a lot longer
Zman5778
Moderator
This is something I've often wondered..........
I think it's entirely possible that had we gone Regier-----Botts-----Murray, we'd be in infinitely better shape than what we actually did.
We needed the patience of Botts going into the initial stages of the tank/rebuild. Then we needed someone more aggressive like Murray once those initial steps were made.
Of course, we got aggressive a bit too early and patient a bit too late and have totally mucked this thing up.
K8fool
Registered User
K8fool
Registered User
Zman5778
Moderator
On the one hand I agree -- we should be better by attrition. The kids coming up should be better than what's on the roster and anything we get in FA can't be much worse......even if this FA class isn't exactly impressive.
On the other hand -- if the trade market stays stagnant (and after the 2019 Draft, it really has been a stagnant trade market for the most part), there's no way to improve us enough to get into "true playoff contender" status. And what do we really have that's appealing in a trade that can actually help us significantly? Maybe one of our RHDs, but what kind of help could we get? Are we at the point where we can auction off 1st round picks to improve?
OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,821
- 7,276
Disagree completely. Botts' incompetence is being confused with patience.
We would've been screwed with Botterill's building of a roster to help develop players. Not to mention the amount of draft capital wasted for no reason whatsoever.
Buffaloed
webmaster
It's a process. Murray was purgatory. Botterill is hell.
Seriously, think Botterill sold the Pegula's on a 5 year plan. He was known for implementing 5 year plans in Pittsburgh.
Zman5778
Moderator
An incompetent GM doesn't make the Nylander for Jokiharju trade. Or acquires a guy like Miller (admittedly at a highish price) to fill a need. Or a guy like Montour when it appeared as if Guhle had stalled. Or Jeff Skinner for a bag of pucks.
Yes, I agree that he's made some terrible moves. And given out some terrible contracts.
But I don't buy the argument that he's some bumbling baffoon.
Zman5778
Moderator
It's a process. Murray was purgatory. Botterill is hell.
Seriously, think Botterill sold the Pegula's on a 5 year plan. He was known for implementing 5 year plans in Pittsburgh.
Again I draw the Sabres/Bills parallel. Beane/McDermott sold the Pegulas on a long-term plan with step 1 being changing the culture, getting rid of problem children and getting our cap under control.
I think Botts sold the Pegulas on the same plan -- change the culture, get rid of problem children and get the cap under control. Difference is: Beane/McDermott knew who needed to go and who needed to stay. Botterill completely botched the who needed to go idea and has more or less completely mis-read the trade market. That and the Bills had a better base with which to work, but that's neither here nor there.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,641
- 2,410
The difference is they adequately replaced players. If Josh Allen and Tre White weren't showing signs of being franchise players we would be very upset McDermott and Beane let Gilmore walk and chose to pass on Mahomes. There are still people upset they passed on Mahomes.
McDermott and Beane have made mistakes they just have also made good decisions. Botterill has yet to hit on anything. I said before the season if Botterill were able to turn Ristolainen into a 2c then I would probably have to give him credit. Well so far that hasn't happened and I'm not confident it will.
Zman5778
Moderator
I mean....yeah. But IMO Botts is selling the Pegulas on this offseason being the one to change the franchise (IE, adequately replace players).
OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,821
- 7,276
You can thank Chicago for that Nylander move. But that wasn't a move of patience, just like making the decision to keep him on the roster when your RD were filled up and you were expecting guys to come back isn't a sign of patience, but of incompetence. Furthermore, not making any moves to clear up some space on the roster is a sign of incompetence. Keeping him up all year is a sign of impatience.
What need did Miller exactly fill? If it was a 3rd pairing role, then it seems to me you could that role via free agency, or even guys from the AHL, which would be a lot better option than wasting 2nd and 5th round picks. Also wasting those picks on a 3rd pairing guy, is a sign of incompetence not patience.
Trading Guhle out of the stable for a slightly more experienced player in Montour is not an example of patience. Not doing anything by collecting RD after that trade is a sign of incompetence.
Trading for Skinner, with that bag of draft picks, in a year you are not competing isn't a sign of patience. Going after Skinner at the TDL or offseason and keeping your picks is the more patient path. Inflating a guys value and then backing yourself into a corner "because you need to sign the guy now" with a horrible contract is a sign of incompetence.
Having your development system full of players that would be developing, where you have players out of position instead of getting quality development minutes is not a sign of patience, but a sign of incompetence.
His roster construction has been example after example of incompetence.
Buffaloed
webmaster
McDermott/Beane work in tandem. No one knows who the problem players are better than the coach. I don't think Housley was helpful at all. He may not even have been consulted. Krueger mentioned that one of the reasons he accepted the job was because Botterill was determined to change the culture.
Duddy
Everyday is
- Dec 24, 2005
- 12,087
- 1,444
Thats a pretty bold and stupid strategy. Because you never know who will be available, who wants to sign here and if you even have the space for all the maybe moves.
Just wasting seasons to get to a point that Botts sees fit to bring maybe good players in is really really bad.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,641
- 2,410
I've always felt that Botterill had a long-term rebuild of the entire organization as his plan but he is so hard to figure out. I think we'll start seeing real hockey moves by Botterill this offseason but I think he will still be cautious this offseason because of the expansion draft following next season.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,641
- 2,410
He's making some moves. He's added defense and Skinner. There's players he's traded for that will likely be large parts of the team in 1-2 years down the road. Problem is it's very hard to have confidence that he can build up the rest of the roster.
SundherDome
I'm tired, Boss.
And yet when the culture began to turn toxic again, he did ..... (Everybody say it with me)
Nothing
Consider your points.
Would the biggest buffoon on this board, the poster you think routinely shows a lack of understanding of hockey in general or management, would they have not done the,
Joker deal...
Skinner trade....
I think those are easy answers.
Miller and Montour? Harder to say and harder to say those were smart deals.
But when you look at three plus years, and you have only Miller and Montour as proactive deals that might be good.... It's not great.
Let's assume Botts got us to exactly the same place as Murray did before the O'Reilly trade.
From what you have seen so far, what makes you think that Botts would have gotten them out of basement in less than 5 years?
And don't forget, no O'Reilly and everyone traded for O'Reilly sucked out, but Compher and O'Reilly, depth players.
It's a tough sell to make me believe we wouldn't become Oiler east, just faster. Best case is we go last place and get Matthews, who basically fills the O'Reilly spot, with piss poor upcoming first overalls.
Bendium
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2019
- 1,907
- 1,489
I am neither a big Botterill supporter or hater. I am a big Buffalo Sabres supporter and fan. I want my team to get better like everyone else. When I go back and look at all of Botterill's moves and the conditions and timing, I see plenty of hits, and plenty of misses. Most of the moves made sense on one level or another at the time of the move. This summer looked good to me until the last move of trading defense for the 2C fell thru. If that had gotten done I think our whole conversation is different right now as the club would have been much more balanced from the start.
I view him so far as a inexperienced but learning GM. However you view it, the roster is set to clear a lot of cap this offseason and next. Over half the roster will change out over the next 2 years. Every time you change coaches it takes them some time to figure out which players can and cannot play well in their system. Changing GM's right now is an almost certainty to also change coaches for the 7th coach in 9 years. You want to keep screwing up player development and the ability to build a team around a style or system? Keep changing coaches. This is my number one reason I do not want to change GM/Coach right now.
Ralph has had one year to develop his system and figure out which players belong on the Sabres bus and which don't. Now he and Jason can go into the deadline and offseason knowing the players they have, what they need in their system, and make choices by trade, UFA, RFA, draft, ect., that build on it. With as much cap availability and change that is about occur, I think it is just as big a risk to bring in a new coach and GM that don't know the core players. A lot of core players, including Jack appear to like playing for Ralph and are working with him to build a system they are vested in. That's a good thing that these players haven't had in a long time. I don't think changing that right now makes us better.
Rock and a hard place, but put me down on the side of going thru this offseason with Jason/Kruger in place. If by December we are not playing well with an improved roster, and legitimately looking like we are set for a real push for the playoffs, then I will be very much on board with a midseason GM change.
I view him so far as a inexperienced but learning GM. However you view it, the roster is set to clear a lot of cap this offseason and next. Over half the roster will change out over the next 2 years. Every time you change coaches it takes them some time to figure out which players can and cannot play well in their system. Changing GM's right now is an almost certainty to also change coaches for the 7th coach in 9 years. You want to keep screwing up player development and the ability to build a team around a style or system? Keep changing coaches. This is my number one reason I do not want to change GM/Coach right now.
Ralph has had one year to develop his system and figure out which players belong on the Sabres bus and which don't. Now he and Jason can go into the deadline and offseason knowing the players they have, what they need in their system, and make choices by trade, UFA, RFA, draft, ect., that build on it. With as much cap availability and change that is about occur, I think it is just as big a risk to bring in a new coach and GM that don't know the core players. A lot of core players, including Jack appear to like playing for Ralph and are working with him to build a system they are vested in. That's a good thing that these players haven't had in a long time. I don't think changing that right now makes us better.
Rock and a hard place, but put me down on the side of going thru this offseason with Jason/Kruger in place. If by December we are not playing well with an improved roster, and legitimately looking like we are set for a real push for the playoffs, then I will be very much on board with a midseason GM change.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
Speculation: Armchair GM 2024-25 Season, Craig Conroy's Can Do Calgary Flames
- Latest: RasmusAndersson
-
