I'm very happy with Deslaurier, but he's far from irreplaceable. Versteeg could be a nice piece in the middle of this lineup, and will certainly provide more offense.
- nfph

I agree, and I know it sounds kind of stupid but I think if I was going to draw up a 4th liner it would be him. He seems like a TM guy - tough, fast, big, mean and plays hard. I don't hate Versteeg... I just think you can get those guys anywhere (maybe I am undervaluing him)

I agree there are a few guys in our pipeline who you can insert for Desi and get the same player. Similar how imo he made Foligno expendable
- hubie

Yeah, except Foligno made Foligno expendable, unfortunately. Pretty disappointing.

I agree, and I know it sounds kind of stupid but I think if I was going to draw up a 4th liner it would be him. He seems like a TM guy - tough, fast, big, mean and plays hard. I don't hate Versteeg... I just think you can get those guys anywhere (maybe I am undervaluing him)
- Slump Buster

They're different guys, to me. I can say that if it were D for Versteeg straight-up, I'd be saying we won that trade. And again, I'm very happy with the idea of D on our fourth line for many, many years.

Yeah, except Foligno made Foligno expendable, unfortunately. Pretty disappointing.
- nfph

I think Foligno is a victim of all the turmoil here. Too many different coaches and different things being asked of him. Ruff seemed to think he was going to be an offensive juggernaut because of his early success and it confused him I think. He wasn't playing the style game that got him to the NHL in the first place. Then there was Rolston who was in way over his head. Nolan seemed to get him back to where he needed to be, but the shoulder injury during Nolan's first season didn't allow him to play the physical game he needed to. He definitely looked better this year, but the hand injury kept him out for a while.

not sure what needs to be "solved"
- Michael Pachla

Not having a goalie for 1

Not having a goalie for 1
- hubie

this year?...next year?...or in the future?

I think Foligno is a victim of all the turmoil here. Too many different coaches and different things being asked of him. Ruff seemed to think he was going to be an offensive juggernaut because of his early success and it confused him I think. He wasn't playing the style game that got him to the NHL in the first place. Then there was Rolston who was in way over his head. Nolan seemed to get him back to where he needed to be, but the shoulder injury during Nolan's first season didn't allow him to play the physical game he needed to. He definitely looked better this year, but the hand injury kept him out for a while.
- HonkFortheGoose

Had he not come out guns a blazing at the end of the year where he had 13 in 14, he'd have had another full year in the AHL. Honestly that wouldn't have been a bad idea.

Not having a goalie for 1
- hubie

There are several signed for this coming season.

this year?...next year?...or in the future?
- Michael Pachla

Yes, as of today we dont have a goalie for atleast 2 years. Fucale could atleast start playing this year

I'm very happy with Deslaurier, but he's far from irreplaceable. Versteeg could be a nice piece in the middle of this lineup, and will certainly provide more offense.
- nfph

He'd be a decent stop gap. Not in Murray's philosophical wheelhouse though.

I love his vision for this team, or so I'm led to believe.

We have plenty of young kids, and eventually we're going to need to trade some of them simply because our ranks are/will be overflowing soon.

That said, I think the original intention was to draft all these guys, figure out who will be staples and who is expendable. Those who are seen as expendable can be packaged together with other assets to bring in a bigger asset in the same age group as the rest of the (future) core of this team. This is why I'll always argue against trading for vets around or older than (around)29. They just don't fit the mold. I assume we'll be contending in three years. Trading our young assets for old guys is worthless to me. By the time we'll actually need them to produce, they'll be in decline or gone.

Not to mention this is also Murray's view.

I know a lot of foreign fans come on here with proposals to snag our young guys, and that's all well and good. Sometimes the value is pretty close, usually it's not. But most people don't understand how this team is operating. As much as I despise anything ROR, he technically makes sense for this team due to his age and skill set. Trading for guys like Sharp, Thornton, Anderson, Marleau, Hossa, Kunitz, whatever, are an absolute waste of assets.

What other fans don't realize is that we don't give a (frank) if we're good next year. Our game plan is to grow as a team and not acquire quick fixes, because in all honesty, all that does is help us draft a few spots higher next year.

- HonkFortheGoose

There are several signed for this coming season.
- dadeadhead

Johnson in my eyes still makes us not have a goalie.

Johnson in my eyes still makes us not have a goalie.
- hubie

There are goalies signed.

The way Irbe churns them out, it should be the least of your worries.

Yes, as of today we dont have a goalie for atleast 2 years. Fucale could atleast start playing this year
- hubie

We've been round and round with the goalie conversation. There are several decention options out there - we'll get one of them and see if he is the one. If not, we'll get more.

Had he not come out guns a blazing at the end of the year where he had 13 in 14, he'd have had another full year in the AHL. Honestly that wouldn't have been a bad idea.
- dadeadhead

Agreed. I know a lot of people say he's still just here because of his name, but sometimes I think people have too high of expectations for him because of his name.

Not to mention it took Nick quite a few years to really turn into a guy that was a difference maker, so it's not like all hope is lost on Marcus. I'm fine with having him in my bottom 6.

He'd be a decent stop gap. Not in Murray's philosophical wheelhouse though.

I love his vision for this team, or so I'm led to believe.

We have plenty of young kids, and eventually we're going to need to trade some of them simply because our ranks are/will be overflowing soon.

That said, I think the original intention was to draft all these guys, figure out who will be staples and who is expendable. Those who are seen as expendable can be packaged together with other assets to bring in a bigger asset in the same age group as the rest of the (future) core of this team. This is why I'll always argue against trading for vets around or older than (around)29. They just don't fit the mold. I assume we'll be contending in three years. Trading our young assets for old guys is worthless to me. By the time we'll actually need them to produce, they'll be in decline or gone.

Not to mention this is also Murray's view.

I know a lot of foreign fans come on here with proposals to snag our young guys, and that's all well and good. Sometimes the value is pretty close, usually it's not. But most people don't understand how this team is operating. As much as I despise anything ROR, he technically makes sense for this team due to his age and skill set. Trading for guys like Sharp, Thornton, Anderson, Marleau, Hossa, Kunitz, whatever, are an absolute waste of assets.

What other fans don't realize is that we don't give a (frank) if we're good next year. Our game plan is to grow as a team and not acquire quick fixes, because in all honesty, all that does is help us draft a few spots higher next year.
- TheSabresTaco

Could not agree more, i think a lot of other fans don't understand that we dont expect to be good next year or even the next and that we dont want to trade for the big names that give us a few years and then POOF. Sabres fans have fully bought in to GMTM and his plan and this rebuild and its hard from an outside point of view for people to understand that we are happy with that.

There are goalies signed.

The way Irbe churns them out, it should be the least of your worries.
- dadeadhead

WHo else is signed that is nhl ready? Only seeing Johnson under contract

Agreed. I know a lot of people say he's still just here because of his name, but sometimes I think people have too high of expectations for him because of his name.

Not to mention it took Nick quite a few years to really turn into a guy that was a difference maker, so it's not like all hope is lost on Marcus. I'm fine with having him in my bottom 6.
- HonkFortheGoose

One was a 1st rounder the other wasn't though.

Yes, as of today we dont have a goalie for atleast 2 years. Fucale could atleast start playing this year
- hubie

Where? In Buffalo? He's still years away from being an NHL goaltender. He'll need probably at least 2 years in the AHL before he'd be ready. In 2 years we could have Ullmark up at the NHL level so how is that any different?

We've been round and round with the goalie conversation. There are several decention options out there - we'll get one of them and see if he is the one. If not, we'll get more.
- Slump Buster

Correct but as of this post we are in a difficult situation, that we didnt have to be in

WHo else is signed that is nhl ready? Only seeing Johnson under contract
- hubie

Ullmark

Makarov

Johnson

Are all signed to NHL deals, It's not like they have nothing. They will sign/trade for someone.

The way Irbe churns them out, he really can make chicken salad out of chicken sh!t.

Where? In Buffalo? He's still years away from being an NHL goaltender. He'll need probably at least 2 years in the AHL before he'd be ready. In 2 years we could have Ullmark up at the NHL level so how is that any different?
- HonkFortheGoose

He is more ready than anything we have

He'd be a decent stop gap. Not in Murray's philosophical wheelhouse though.

I love his vision for this team, or so I'm led to believe.

We have plenty of young kids, and eventually we're going to need to trade some of them simply because our ranks are/will be overflowing soon.

That said, I think the original intention was to draft all these guys, figure out who will be staples and who is expendable. Those who are seen as expendable can be packaged together with other assets to bring in a bigger asset in the same age group as the rest of the (future) core of this team. This is why I'll always argue against trading for vets around or older than (around)29. They just don't fit the mold. I assume we'll be contending in three years. Trading our young assets for old guys is worthless to me. By the time we'll actually need them to produce, they'll be in decline or gone.

Not to mention this is also Murray's view.

I know a lot of foreign fans come on here with proposals to snag our young guys, and that's all well and good. Sometimes the value is pretty close, usually it's not. But most people don't understand how this team is operating. As much as I despise anything ROR, he technically makes sense for this team due to his age and skill set. Trading for guys like Sharp, Thornton, Anderson, Marleau, Hossa, Kunitz, whatever, are an absolute waste of assets.

What other fans don't realize is that we don't give a (frank) if we're good next year. Our game plan is to grow as a team and not acquire quick fixes, because in all honesty, all that does is help us draft a few spots higher next year.
- TheSabresTaco

Those words came out of Bylsma's mouth right after he was announced as coach as well. They're playing the kids this year and letting them grow. The vets were pretty much put in place last year when they signed Moulson and Gionta and traded for Gorges.

Ullmark Not ready

Makarov Not ready

Johnson sucks

Are all signed to NHL deals, It's not like they have nothing. They will sign/trade for someone.

The way Irbe churns them out, he really can make chicken salad out of chicken sh!t.
- dadeadhead

He is more ready than anything we have
- hubie

His sub .900 sv% in 14-15 disagree with you.