When you "don't disagree" i assume that means you agree?

"Probably won't get " means unlikely?

I agree that he (berglund) is unlikely to score 20 goals.

Berglund will be single digit goals and super hated on this board.
- Boss34

Usually it means you're kind of in the middle. It's not disagreeing, but it's not a full-throated agreement either.

I mean, cmon, you're gonna cherry pick one of the worst deals since Y2K?
- jcragcrumple

How about hall for Larsson

How about hall for Larsson
- TheHank

I said ONE OF

I should have said, worst deal, non-chiarelli division

I said ONE OF

I should have said, worst deal, non-chiarelli division
- jcragcrumple

Usually it means you're kind of in the middle. It's not disagreeing, but it's not a full-throated agreement either.
- Wetbandit1

Pervert

Usually it means you're kind of in the middle. It's not disagreeing, but it's not a full-throated agreement either.
- Wetbandit1

Kind of like saying thank god hillary isn’t the president. Doesn’t mean you wanted trump, just thankful that female dog isn’t in office.

Pervert
- jochfr

I see what you did there

1.) True
2.) Berglund isn't holding Nylander back from a spot. There are others below Berglund taking up spots. Plus, Nylander looked great on Berglund's wing, and so did Berglund
3.) Disagree. I think he's a pretty solid center. You have to admit, he's great on the dot. His f/o ability is good and he's defensively reliable.

The money situation is undeniable. He's making 3.8 to be a solid defensive forward. It's really fine.

I'll agree to an underwhelming return in terms of star-caliber play, but Botterill made the move for cap reasons, and to fill out depth that's been sorely lacking.

The speed is the biggest knock, and you're not wrong. But there's a longer term vision at play here
- jcragcrumple

What’s the longer term vision?
Seems like bringing in guys that don’t fit the vision, like Berglund & Sobatka, just delay us from getting to where we want to be

I appreciate the faceoffs,
but if Berglund isn’t gonna score (and his whole line isn’t gonna produce offensively)...
the he needs to be 4C
and taking draws in our own end

Rather see if a 3rd line of kids that might be able to score- something like...
Nylander-Rodrigues-Thompson

I’m also ok if we first try putting Berglund at LW in the top6 to see if that helps

Can’t keep doing this 1 line scoring BS though
That “depth” u talk about really hasn’t been there yet

I mean, cmon, you're gonna cherry pick one of the worst deals since Y2K?
- jcragcrumple

Was just an obvious example
Good prospects do get traded

And again...
we didn’t have to move ROR
*according to Jack, there wasn’t even tension between them

We (at least should’ve) had the leverage in that trade, but what happened?
-we got a “b” prospect, not 1 of their top guys
-had to take back Berglund & Sobatka
-and even had to pay the 10mil bonus

I get there’s supposed reasons for all that,
but there’s absolutely no way that anyone can say Botts did a good job on that trade

What’s the longer term vision?
Seems like bringing in guys that don’t fit the vision, like Berglund & Sobatka, just delay us from getting to where we want to be

I appreciate the faceoffs,
but if Berglund isn’t gonna score (and his whole line isn’t gonna produce offensively)...
the he needs to be 4C
and taking draws in our own end

Rather see if a 3rd line of kids that might be able to score- something like...
Nylander-Rodrigues-Thompson

I’m also ok if we first try putting Berglund at LW in the top6 to see if that helps

Can’t keep doing this 1 line scoring BS though
That “depth” u talk about really hasn’t been there yet
- jdfitz77

Only 6-games in with a bunch of new players. We are 3 and 3. Better goal-tending and depth. Plus Dahlin and great youngin's percolating in Rochester. We will be fine. 85 points this year and 97+ next year and the playoffs.

Most importantly, no more Molson, Larsson, Girgs, Blow-you and Pommer after this year - guaranteed. Throw in two of Scandella, Bogo, Sobotka and Okposo off the team 2 years from now. Life is good.

Pervert
- jochfr

Being in the middle of a full-throated agreement is a good place to be, unless it's that drinking game, Devil's Triangle.

Only 6-games in with a bunch of new players. We are 3 and 3. Better goal-tending and depth. Plus Dahlin and great youngin's percolating in Rochester. We will be fine. 85 points this year and 97+ next year and the playoffs.

Most importantly, no more Molson, Larsson, Girgs, Blow-you and Pommer after this year - guaranteed. Throw in two of Scandella, Bogo, Sobotka and Okposo off the team 2 years from now. Life is good.
- SabreWest

Don’t get me wrong...
i do feel we are headed in the right direction

But decisions like trading for Berglund still puzzle me
I guarantee ppl are all gonna want him gone before his contract is up
Probably sooner than later

Everything is relative boss.
If we are in fact talking about a wimpy, slow, small, etc player at least he is on a cheaper bridge deal which could in turn bring a “decent” haul for him. I was responding to a comment regarding him being signed to a bridge deal and being able to move on from him.
- TheHank

Well explained

Usually it means you're kind of in the middle. It's not disagreeing, but it's not a full-throated agreement either.
- Wetbandit1

Maybe it's me, but the board has been cordial and a learning experience this afternoon.

What’s the longer term vision?
Seems like bringing in guys that don’t fit the vision, like Berglund & Sobatka, just delay us from getting to where we want to be

I appreciate the faceoffs,
but if Berglund isn’t gonna score (and his whole line isn’t gonna produce offensively)...
the he needs to be 4C
and taking draws in our own end

Rather see if a 3rd line of kids that might be able to score- something like...
Nylander-Rodrigues-Thompson

I’m also ok if we first try putting Berglund at LW in the top6 to see if that helps

Can’t keep doing this 1 line scoring BS though
That “depth” u talk about really hasn’t been there yet
- jdfitz77

I agree with all of that in your first point.

As to the second, I would just say that we have 4 lines of NHL-caliber players for the first time in at least 6 years. Actual, reasonable players

As to the long-term vision, it's increased cap flexibility, and the ability to manage three 3 sub-4 mil contracts. If Thompson and Sobotka don't work out, then nothing is tied up for long. Berglund's 3.8 can be dealt with in a lot of ways if it doesn't work out.

Don’t get me wrong...
i do feel we are headed in the right direction

But decisions like trading for Berglund still puzzle me
I guarantee ppl are all gonna want him gone before his contract is up
Probably sooner than later
- jdfitz77

19:47 into the first game, I wanted him gone.

Lack of hustle

I still think berglund was a cap dump, with swedish on the side.

The legwand going to lunch with eichel every day thing.

Minus berglund and dahlin having lunch part

so what's going on with ror and Berglund?

so what's going on with ror and Berglund?
- Michael Pachla

Bad catholics

im gonna bank on the sabres rotating good games and poor games for a while and i think they'll play well tonight but the shorks will just be too good

so what's going on with ror and Berglund?
- Michael Pachla

Jesus Christ.

Best I can do here

im gonna bank on the sabres rotating good games and poor games for a while and i think they'll play well tonight but the shorks will just be too good
- robz228

If they take 2/5 on this trip (win one more) it won’t be a disaster. Anything more and they’re still at least pseudo-500. I can live with it.

Bad catholics
- jcragcrumple

a lot of characters dedicated to that

Jesus Christ.

Best I can do here
- TheHank

you forgot, suck it beady...

(or something like that)

you forgot, suck it beady...

(or something like that)
- Michael Pachla

(frank). I’ll learn, I promise.

you forgot, suck it beady...

(or something like that)
- Michael Pachla

Michael - great write up:

bergland and sobotka cap dump or wanted by jbotts?