Roster Thread (2023-2024 Season)

[NotABadPeriod]

Yeah, I won't besmirch Granato's work with the team over the last 2 seasons, because the culture shift and the growth we saw from the young guns was real. But I'm slowly becoming convinced that he's a developmental coach only --- he can't take that next step coaching structured, winning hockey at the NHL level. Part of the problem there may be his inexperienced assistants, but he chose those guys.

Yep.

He was the right coach at the right time, but the time has changed, and it doesn't appear Granato can change properly with it.

 

[TehDoak]

Overall, I think the biggest flaw here has been attempting to mirror what the bills have done.

Adams and Granato pounded the table 'culture culture culture'. They moved out the Risto, Reinhart, and Eichel for 'not wanting to be here'.

And for a bit, it seemed to work. We saw continuous improvement over two seasons. We saw players from the scrap heap (Skinner, Thompson) become top line players. We saw young players (Dahlin, Samuelsson, Cozens, Peterka, Quinn) all improve. We saw Tuch have a career year.

But, in the end, culture without competency is fleeting. Organizational competency is what builds the structure and backbone on top where a good culture can flourish. And when adversity arises, having the organizational competency to fall back on is keeps an injury or two or some bad bounces from spiraling. Culture can't overcome organizational incompetence.

And that is what we have currently. We have a GM doesn't know how to manage assets or build a roster, we have a coach who is increasingly overmatched on a nightly basis, and we have an owner who isn't willing to cede control of the hockey operations to someone with experience in building a winning organization. Until the big changes are made, the volume of talent we have won't amount to much other than maybe a bubble playoff team if the stars align like they did last year.

 

[Zman5778]

Overall, I think the biggest flaw here has been attempting to mirror what the bills have done.

Adams and Granato pounded the table 'culture culture culture'. They moved out the Risto, Reinhart, and Eichel for 'not wanting to be here'.

And for a bit, it seemed to work. We saw continuous improvement over two seasons. We saw players from the scrap heap (Skinner, Thompson) become top line players. We saw young players (Dahlin, Samuelsson, Cozens, Peterka, Quinn) all improve. We saw Tuch have a career year.

But, in the end, culture without competency is fleeting. Organizational competency is what builds the structure and backbone on top where a good culture can flourish. And when adversity arises, having the organizational competency to fall back on is keeps an injury or two or some bad bounces from spiraling. Culture can't overcome organizational incompetence.

And that is what we have currently. We have a GM doesn't know how to manage assets or build a roster, we have a coach who is increasingly overmatched on a nightly basis, and we have an owner who isn't willing to cede control of the hockey operations to someone with experience in building a winning organization. Until the big changes are made, the volume of talent we have won't amount to much other than maybe a bubble playoff team if the stars align like they did last year.

Legitimate question here:

Did the Blackhawks have a guy with experience in building a winner before/as they built their team?
What about the Kings?
The Lightning had Yzerman, but he had never actually built anything as a front office guy before Tampa.

My instinct/memory is to say "No.". Tallon didn't have much of any sort of history before he built Chicago.
Lombardi kinda built the Sharks, but the Sharks never actually won anything before he got fired.

All of this to say -- I think the whole "hiring someone with experience in building a winner" is a bit overrated.

 

[joshjull]

 

[HogtownSabresfan]

Based on Elliott Friedman's podcast today, it sounds like the Sabres are out of the hunt for Kane.

 

[dortt]

Yep.

He was the right coach at the right time, but the time has changed, and it doesn't appear Granato can change properly with it.

we have a team who is not built to play structured hockey.

Granato needs to coach based upon the talent we have. He is going down the Ruff rabbit hole of square pegs in round holes. Just play the run and gun. UPL and Levi are good enough to win in that system, as showed last year

 

[Zman5778]

Based on Elliott Friedman's podcast today, it sounds like the Sabres are out of the hunt for Kane.

Excellent news if true.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Excellent news if true.

Yes but the reason is far from excellent.

It's hard to get excited when stars pass on your team because you suck too badly. I don't want Kane either, but it's a bad sign that players and agents still universally see Buffalo as the least attractive place to play in the Atlantic.

 

[Zman5778]

Yes but the reason is far from excellent.

It's hard to get excited when stars pass on your team because you suck too badly. I don't want Kane either, but it's a bad sign that players and agents still universally see Buffalo as the least attractive place to play in the Atlantic.

You're assuming that Kane is saying no to the Sabres.....and not that we're saying no to him.

Unless that podcast in question did say that Kane is saying no to us.


Also -- if Buffalo was the least attractive place to play in the Atlantic, we certainly wouldn't have landed Erik Johnson. He flat-out said that he had other offers and chose to come here, especially thanks to KO. Clifton chose to come here because Granato was here.

 

[zenthusiast]

Tbf I imagine EJ has a deadline agreement

 

[Zman5778]

Tbf I imagine EJ has a deadline agreement

It's certainly possible.

 

[zenthusiast]

I think we’re probably more attractive than Ottawa unless Francos want a MTL alternative, so that’s something

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

You're assuming that Kane is saying no to the Sabres.....and not that we're saying no to him.

Unless that podcast in question did say that Kane is saying no to us.


Also -- if Buffalo was the least attractive place to play in the Atlantic, we certainly wouldn't have landed Erik Johnson. He flat-out said that he had other offers and chose to come here, especially thanks to KO. Clifton chose to come here because Granato was here.

Buffalo is by far the least attractive place to play in the Atlantic, a fact that is proven over and over again every season. Though, yes, you will always be able to find small, tiny incidents that can be looked at in a vacuum to convince yourself that this isn't true.

 

[HogtownSabresfan]

You're assuming that Kane is saying no to the Sabres.....and not that we're saying no to him.

Unless that podcast in question did say that Kane is saying no to us.


Also -- if Buffalo was the least attractive place to play in the Atlantic, we certainly wouldn't have landed Erik Johnson. He flat-out said that he had other offers and chose to come here, especially thanks to KO. Clifton chose to come here because Granato was here.

There are $3.25 million reasons why Erik Johnson signed in Buffalo. Clifton was given $10 M over three years -- overpay for 3rd pair guys. It doesn't bother me because we have cap room. But guys wanting to sign in Buffalo will be based on money or winning. We offer the opportunity to miss the playoffs for the entire term of your contract, which is not going to help your long-term value as a player. We need to win, and guys will sign. Buffalo isn't Florida with no taxes, but it's on the East Coast with limited travel and proximity to lots of places by plane for families of players. Just win.

Tbf I imagine EJ has a deadline agreement

Who cares? What's he actually going to get at the deadline even 50% retained which Pegula will likely nix.

 

[TehDoak]

Legitimate question here:

Did the Blackhawks have a guy with experience in building a winner before/as they built their team?

They brought in Scotty Bowman as a special advisor pretty early on because they recognized Tallon's lack of experience.

What about the Kings?

Dean Lombardi built the Thornton era Sharks team. He then rebuilt the flyers. He then won two cups with LA. And he mentored their current GM (Blake)

The Lightning had Yzerman, but he had never actually built anything as a front office guy before Tampa.

He interned under Ken Holland for multiple seasons. Holland is getting roasted now for his Oilers work, but his work for 2+ decades with Detroit is as exemplary as you can get.

My instinct/memory is to say "No.". Tallon didn't have much of any sort of history before he built Chicago.
Lombardi kinda built the Sharks, but the Sharks never actually won anything before he got fired.

All of this to say -- I think the whole "hiring someone with experience in building a winner" is a bit overrated.

IMHO, there are two basic tracks for successful GMs.

1. With first time GMs, typically you want someone who is currently working under a successful GM. And when you bring them on, you surround them with experienced staff/advisors who can help them with questions about roster construction, how to handle contracts, etc.
2. With experienced GMs, you want someone who has actually built a playoff team or been a part of a good rebuild, even if they didn't win a cup. Sustainable success is what you want when starting from nothing.

What you don't do is simply hire someone with zero front office experience at any level and surround them with zero voices with legit team building experience and hope for the best. Which is what we've done with Adams.

 

[Irie]

Dean Lombardi built the Thornton era Sharks team. He then rebuilt the flyers. He then won two cups with LA. And he mentored their current GM (Blake)

There was actually quite a bit of time between the firing of Lombardi and Doug Wilson trading for Thornton.(2 years, 8 months and a full lockout). If you are looking up the stats and seeing Thornton on the sharks in the Lombardi era, that was his cousin, Scott.

The team that Wilson inherited from Lombardi was not great, but Lombardi built some above average teams in the late 90s, they just had the unfortunate luck of being in the west with Detroit, Colorado, and Dallas during that era. (That and the fact that they mostly drafted terribly because Tim Burke is a moron).

 

[Irie]

Overall, I think the biggest flaw here has been attempting to mirror what the bills have done.

Adams and Granato pounded the table 'culture culture culture'. They moved out the Risto, Reinhart, and Eichel for 'not wanting to be here'.

And for a bit, it seemed to work. We saw continuous improvement over two seasons. We saw players from the scrap heap (Skinner, Thompson) become top line players. We saw young players (Dahlin, Samuelsson, Cozens, Peterka, Quinn) all improve. We saw Tuch have a career year.

But, in the end, culture without competency is fleeting. Organizational competency is what builds the structure and backbone on top where a good culture can flourish. And when adversity arises, having the organizational competency to fall back on is keeps an injury or two or some bad bounces from spiraling. Culture can't overcome organizational incompetence.

And that is what we have currently. We have a GM doesn't know how to manage assets or build a roster, we have a coach who is increasingly overmatched on a nightly basis, and we have an owner who isn't willing to cede control of the hockey operations to someone with experience in building a winning organization. Until the big changes are made, the volume of talent we have won't amount to much other than maybe a bubble playoff team if the stars align like they did last year.

I think you are exaggerating the doom and gloom of the state of this team here.

This team is not struggling because they are built terribly (and I am someone who has been critical of how they are built for years now - it is true that they are not built great and they are built terrible for the playoffs, but that is not the huge problem that is ailing them during this regular season.)

They are young.

If Dahlin, Power, Samuelson, Quinn, Peterka, Benson, Cozens, and Krebs were all 25-29 right now, this team would be smoking teams just on talent alone.

Granato's system has moving pieces. The players are expected to be interchangeable and then adapt to the given situations and it doesn't have a lot of structure.

For young players learning defensive responsibilities without a rigid structure, there is going to be expected growing pains. For the few young players that are playing without experiencing nerves of playing in the NHL, the transition will be hard. For most of the kids that are still experiencing nerves everytime they step on the ice, the process is probably quite daunting.

For these young kids I personally feel strongly that more structure is the better way to ease them into the roles. If they have a simplified job and they know what to do and where to be, they should be more effective and their adjustment should be a whole lot easier.

Granato is trying to do "more", but I don't know if his young team is up to it.

 

[TehDoak]

I think you are exaggerating the doom and gloom of the state of this team here.

This team is not struggling because they are built terribly (and I am someone who has been critical of how they are built for years now - it is true that they are not built great and they are built terrible for the playoffs, but that is not the huge problem that is ailing them during this regular season.)

They are young.

Youth certainly is part of it.

If Dahlin, Power, Samuelson, Quinn, Peterka, Benson, Cozens, and Krebs were all 25-29 right now, this team would be smoking teams just on talent alone.

This isn't even close to accurate. The idea that every young player who has success on their ELC grows into a top tier NHL player later just isn't accurate. Growth certainly isn't guaranteed in the NHL, and it will never be linear.

Granato's system has moving pieces. The players are expected to be interchangeable and then adapt to the given situations and it doesn't have a lot of structure.

For young players learning defensive responsibilities without a rigid structure, there is going to be expected growing pains. For the few young players that are playing without experiencing nerves of playing in the NHL, the transition will be hard. For most of the kids that are still experiencing nerves everytime they step on the ice, the process is probably quite daunting.

For these young kids I personally feel strongly that more structure is the better way to ease them into the roles. If they have a simplified job and they know what to do and where to be, they should be more effective and their adjustment should be a whole lot easier.

Granato is trying to do "more", but I don't know if his young team is up to it.

The problem here is we are year 3 of 'growing pains'

Years 1 and 2, that was lessened because expectations were low.

Last year raised the bar. The expectation for many is now playoffs. While that is still possible, it doesn't seem likely at this point.

You can't simply amass young talent and hope for the best. At some point, there has be at least a moderate level of success. And in a league where 50% of the teams make the playoffs, that is the demarcation for success for a young team, making the playoffs.

 

[Irie]

This isn't even close to accurate. The idea that every young player who has success on their ELC grows into a top tier NHL player later just isn't accurate. Growth certainly isn't guaranteed in the NHL, and it will never be linear.

I disagree. I do not believe that in any world it is not fully reasonable and expected that 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 year old kids will not improve (baring injury) to when they are 25-27. It isn't just skill, it is knowledge and understanding the game that will make them better players, on top of their increased developed size and strength which will give them the ability to withstand the physical demands of the league which most of them honestly are not up to currently at their young ages.

The problem here is we are year 3 of 'growing pains'

Years 1 and 2, that was lessened because expectations were low.

Last year raised the bar. The expectation for many is now playoffs. While that is still possible, it doesn't seem likely at this point.

You can't simply amass young talent and hope for the best. At some point, there has be at least a moderate level of success. And in a league where 50% of the teams make the playoffs, that is the demarcation for success for a young team, making the playoffs.

But we are only in year one of the "defensive experiment".

This is why I have been critical of Granato's "let them develop their offense" strategy. In a vacuum, I like the idea, but this team developed a lot of bad habits the past two seasons during their shinny hockey phase, not to mention the plan had severe adverse effects on the confidence of some of their D and goaltending who were constantly hung out to dry in the experiment.

I strongly believe that the right coach could step in and simplify the defensive responsibilities without neutering the offense and it would make the defensive transition much easier for these young guys. Maybe a new assistant could pull it off if Granato would admit his plan and personnel are failing and bring in help and make the changes.

The one thing we agree on is that the current path does not lead to success, i just think we see the impediment differently. You see Adams as the problem. I think a couple of small tweaks and a new coaching philosophy is all this team really needs to get back on the right path.

 

[Ace]

Just sitting here rooting for Kane to pick Detroit on the off chance Pegula feels embarrassed and makes Adams do something.

 

[TehDoak]

I disagree. I do not believe that in any world it is not fully reasonable and expected that 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 year old kids will not improve (baring injury) to when they are 25-27. It isn't just skill, it is knowledge and understanding the game that will make them better players, on top of their increased developed size and strength which will give them the ability to withstand the physical demands of the league which most of them honestly are not up to currently at their young ages.

But that doesn't happen in reality. Growth isn't guaranteed. Often times players are simply more physically mature so they are able to compete right away and they never grow much. Other times they thrive in a sheltered role early and are never able to take on more responsibility. Sometimes getting paid simply takes away the motivation to continue to improve. Plenty of players have been on the all rookie team and just disappear off the map in a few seasons.

But we are only in year one of the "defensive experiment".

This is why I have been critical of Granato's "let them develop their offense" strategy. In a vacuum, I like the idea, but this team developed a lot of bad habits the past two seasons during their shinny hockey phase, not to mention the plan had severe adverse effects on the confidence of some of their D and goaltending who were constantly hung out to dry in the experiment.

I strongly believe that the right coach could step in and simplify the defensive responsibilities without neutering the offense and it would make the defensive transition much easier for these young guys. Maybe a new assistant could pull it off if Granato would admit his plan and personnel are failing and bring in help and make the changes.

The one thing we agree on is that the current path does not lead to success, i just think we see the impediment differently. You see Adams as the problem. I think a couple of small tweaks and a new coaching philosophy is all this team really needs to get back on the right path.

I mostly agree here. I've compared it to trying to get kids to eat vegetables after they've filled up on Candy. The coaches let the kids neglect their own end for 2 full years and are now trying to put the genie back in the bottle.

 

[Meichel Kane]

Kind of rooting for Kane to have a good season so we can retcon "CLASSIC ADAMS NOT MAKING THE NEEDED MOVE" with him.

 

[Beerz]

Apparently Granatos "keep it simple" didn't impress Kane

 

[tsujimoto74]

Apparently Granatos "keep it simple" didn't impress Kane

Good, tbh. I did not want Kane here.

 

[Tatanka]

But I do wish they would address the 3C/4C vet issue. Injuries will happen. A guy who can play up or down and pk would be ideal.