When the losses started to accumulate, I started to read and hear people say things like the Sabres don’t have an identity. I never agreed with this characterization. My position prior to and throughout the season was that the Sabres defense, particularly their mobility, is the team’s greatest strength. That unit’s collective ability to skate and move the puck changed the dynamic of the team, in my view.

Miller is the face of the franchise. As long as he remains a part of the team he’ll be a part of its identity but, prior to and early in the season, he was not mentioned in the beginning of my response to people when asked what makes the Sabres a contender. Goaltender is essential for every team, not just the Sabres. As I saw it, if the Sabres were going to do something special it would happen by way of the skaters on defense — Myers, Ehrhoff, Sekera, Leopold, and Gragnani. I wrote about it in early October.

Whatever your feelings are on the injuries and games missed by the players in that unit, whether you pejoratively call them an excuse for the team’s failure or a circumstance that partially explains the team’s failure, there’s little question they are a part of the story of this Sabres season.

Get ready for some numbers.

First, let’s establish that the seven best defenders on the roster are Tyler Myers, Christian Ehrhoff, Robyn Regehr, Andrej Sekera, Mike Weber, Jordan Leopold, and Alex Sulzer (who replaces Marc-Andre Gragnani on this list). This excludes Brayden McNabb, TJ Brennan, and Joe Finley — the only other defensemen who appeared in the Sabres line-up this season.

When six out of the Sabres seven best defenders were in the line-up, the Sabres record was 31-14-5. When one or more of McNabb, Brennan and Finley were in the line-up — meaning that at least two of the Sabres top seven defenders were unavailable — the Sabres record was 8-18-6. I tracked this figure after one of the Sabres PR reps, Ian Ott, tweeted his numbers after the game on February 8. I assume his are correct. Sorry if the presentation of this data is difficult to follow.

Of course, this doesn’t account for the importance of individual players. Tyler Myers and Christian Ehrhoff are widely considered to be the two most important defenders on the team and both missed a significant amount of time. I agree they’re each very important; both are highly skilled and both play a lot of minutes. I was really impressed with Ehrhoff this season. I didn’t expect he’d be so reliable in the Sabres zone. When he was out of the line-up, the Sabres record was 3-10-3. When Myers was out, it was 8-11-8. The cross-over is small. They were both scratched for the same game in exactly six occasions (2-2-2). If you wanted to argue that the injuries to the defense, specifically Myers and Ehrhoff, directly cost the Sabres a spot in the playoffs, these are the numbers to use:

(Aside: Yesterday, Mike Harrington, Sabres beat reporter for the Buffalo News, tweeted some statistics on Myers and Ehrhoff. Those numbers were used in a report the News published this morning. Most of his figures are wrong. Harrington’s statistic about the Sabres record when Myers is out of the line-up (8-11-7) supposes that Myers missed only 26 games. Myers missed a total of 27 games. It’s also incorrect that the Sabres record was 9-18-8 when one or both Myers and Ehrhoff were out of the line-up, as was tweeted and printed. The correct figure is 9-19-9. The overtime/shootout loss mistake is a reflection of the incorrect Myers stat. The extra regulation loss supposes Myers and Ehrhoff were out of the line-up together for 3 regulation losses and 7 games in total, which is incorrect. They were out of the line-up together for exactly six games: 12/31, 1/3, 3/31, 4/3, 4/5, and 4/7. Only 3/31 and 4/5 were regulation losses. Everything is on the NHL’s website.)

Participants in the injury conversation often treat it as though it were a binary issue; it’s not. Injuries affected the Sabres and made them a weaker team. Everyone should be in agreement on this. They’re part of the overall explanation of the season for every team, every year, whether they qualified for the post-season or not.

Here’s the distinction I want to make clear. Would the Sabres have made the playoffs if they hadn’t lost so many key players to injury? Probably. The injuries were a legitimate problem. Should those injuries have prevented the Sabres from qualifying for the playoffs? No.

The Sabre were 9-19-9 when one or both of Ehrhoff and Myers was out the line-up. Let’s focus on those 37 games. Should the Sabres be able to win a big majority without either player? Probably not. But shouldn’t the Sabres at least manage to be okay without either player? Shouldn’t the rest of the team, without Myers or Ehrhoff or sometimes both, be strong enough to win more than one out of every four games? I think so.

Again, I’m the person who says the defense was the key to this team. I thought the reduction in defensive-zone turnovers would make it easier on the goaltenders. I thought the puck control and timely pinching at the offensive-zone blue-line would really boost the offensive output. I thought this defensive unit would do those things. When they were healthy, they did those things. If anyone should be arguing how crippling those injuries were, it’s me. I don’t want to take it that far.

There’s plenty of people saying the rest of the team needed to be better. I suppose I’m revealing myself as one of those people here. I believed several players who had very poor statistical seasons would have strong or at least decent seasons. I don’t want to rationalize those individual player failures as byproducts of injuries sustained to teammates.

The lesson should be that the Sabres roster from top to bottom was weak. They were probably more skilled than in past seasons but their execution was wildly inconsistent and below average in comparison to the rest of the league. I don’t have reasons for why talent and skill failed to deliver. There’s plenty of ambiguous words and sports clichés people like to use in these types of moments: no-heart, soft, fragile, immature. I don’t know. None of those words are as convincing as the result: 9th place. The results are more compelling than some grafted title ever could be.

The Sabres are led by a group of veterans who, collectively, are only modestly talented. It’s hard for me to imagine this group of leaders taking them very far. I think we’ve all known this for awhile. This season should have removed any doubt.

* * *

I’m not exactly sure when it started but at some point in his career with the Sabres, I grew to dislike Pominville. When his production started to decline, I could never understand why. It was really disappointing to watch as the aura of promise and potential that Pominville had developed early in his professional career began to fade. I couldn’t understand what went wrong for Pominville.

I sort of imagine a lot of the players on the Sabres as characters — competitive archetypes not cartoon character-types. I attribute personalities to a lot of the star athletes based on what I see from them during games. No matter what happens, it’s never been hard for me to support Thomas Vanek and Ryan Miller. I can defend each of them very easily and have done so on this space many times. I think they’re both elite level talents. They’re not perfect. Sometimes they struggle but they struggle and fail in ways that I can understand and follow.

Pominville has just never resonated with me in the way Vanek and Miller have. Vanek was my first choice for the captaincy but I liked the idea of giving it to Pominville simply because of the opportunity it represented for him to grow and evolve into something bigger and better.

* * *

Why has it bothered me to see Pominville’s lack of emotion on the ice? Why has it taken so long to regain an appreciation for him? It’s not just about the scoring numbers.

This is a totally unfair statement to make because I’ve never met or spoken with Pominville but I’m going to put it out there anyway. It seems to me like Pominville fell into the life of a professional athlete. He strikes me as a natural talent who never really had to sell himself. That kid can shoot; I want him to play for me. Pominville surely wanted it; no one makes the NHL without working harder than everyone around him. But based on how he behaves on the ice, Pominville seems like a very normal, grounded person. Someone probably had to ask him if he’d like to try and make a career out of playing professional hockey. Most other professional athletes don’t need to be asked this question; it’s the only life they could ever imagine themselves living and everyone who has spent longer than a second around one of these individuals recognizes this energy. Pominville doesn’t seem like he’s that person and I don’t intended for that speculation to be an insult to his competitiveness.

Pominville simply doesn’t wear the game on his face. He’s centered and never shows his frustration. There’s never any expression of relief or intense celebration that comes from him. He doesn’t create some sort of super-human persona to step inside and become when he’s on the ice. He’s not Atlas or Miller-time. He’s just a guy and a population.

* * *

Somewhere on the web, there is video of Pominville after he scored the series winner against Ottawa in the ’06 playoffs, easily his most memorable moment with the Sabres. He is half jogging to the locker-room, late to join the rest of the team because one of television’s “between-the-benches” commentators was interviewing him after the game had ended. Lindy Ruff was waiting for him in the hallway. As Pominville hustled past, Lindy seemed to be shouting at him, I assume to try and pump him up and make him feel the moment as an individual. I’ll always remember how collected Pominville looked considering what he had just done on the ice. He was smiling, slightly, but it wasn’t how I would expect a young player to look after scoring that goal. Far too reserved.

* * *

One of my favorite players on the Sabres to watch is Andrej Sekera. He’s a totally one dimensional character — non-confrontational and unemotional, sort of like Pominville. But Sekera belongs in the background. Sekera can exist comfortably in a supporting role as someone who steals a scene once in awhile.

Pominville is a lead. I need a bit of depth and conflict to lead characters in order for me to give my full support. Pominville’s conflict, his declining scoring numbers, always felt a little empty to me. I would often wonder — maybe his ability had been overvalued and he would never again become the scorer he was early in his career.

No one could ever doubt Pominville’s shot. His release is great and his pucks always carry a ton of heat. He’s a reliable player away from the puck and gives a solid effort every night. My beef with Pominville in terms of his style is with his skating and his puck control along the boards — both are weak. There was a time last year when I wondered if Pominville might be the slowest up-and-down skater on the team. I saw a player who was easily checked and separated from the puck.

The thing about Pominville now is that he’s scored a lot of the big goals for the Sabres this season. It really can’t be overstated. He scores critical, confidence boosting goals. He’s the Sabres most valuable player this season. It’s honestly not even much of a debate.

* * *

Pominville’s goal Tuesday night in Washington was his finest moment in recent memory. It was downright shocking. The sequence itself was remarkable, of course. Hustle to the blue-line. Win the board battle. Collect the puck. Drift to the slot. Wrist-shot. Five-hole.

The optics, from the Sabres perspective, are great. It was a symbolic moment between the two captains of teams battling against one another for the final playoff position in the Eastern Conference. Ovechkin and his impressive scoring streak. Pominville and his renaissance season.

But the moment was special for another reason beyond the importance of the goal and the way it was scored. Usually, when Pominville scores, he points at the player who made the primary assist and maybe pumps his fist once. I’m not familiar with seeing Pominville raise his arms and curl away from teammates after scoring a goal.

It was strange to see Pominville stand straight and own the center stage. It was his moment and everyone would know it. There was no outward emotion, only a new captain soaking in a massive triumph. Watch, also, as Pominville, who stripped Ovechkin in front of the Sabres bench, faces his players after raising his arms.

A new side to Pominville! This is what I’ve been waiting for from him. He is now the team’s leader for the foreseeable future. Hopefully he will continue to score important goals for the Sabres. If he does, the interesting question becomes whether or not Pominville will behave, from time to time, like he believes he’s the best player on the ice as he did in the Capitals game. He was finally feeling what I imagine Lindy Ruff may have wanted him to feel after scoring the series winner in Ottawa. This is Pominville’s population and we are all just living in it.

How has that turned out? Not well; Penner, playing out the final year of his contract ($4.25 million cap-hit), has been reduced to a punch line in LA. Pancake eater; non goal scorer. Fifty-seven games played so far in the 2011-2012 regular season and just seven goals scored. The Kings offense, as a team, is putrid. As of Saturday morning, only the Wild have a lower goals-per-game average than the Kings.

As disappointing of a season Dustin Penner has had for the Kings, Brad Boyes might end up claiming the title of least-production-for-most-money in the ‘wingers’ category. Boyes has given the Sabres very little all season. The numbers tell the story — a $4-million cap-hit on a 29-year-old winger who has scored just six goals in sixty games.

Even with the maddeningly unproductive Brad Boyes on the team, I don’t think anyone has been more of a disappointment over the course of the season than Drew Stafford. It’s honestly been difficult for me to watch Drew Stafford play at times. Seeing him miss a scoring opportunity irritates me more than any other player on the Sabres.

After Stafford signed the contract last summer, I asked people the following question about Drew Stafford:

Yes or no — would you be satisfied with the following single season goal totals for Stafford in the upcoming four seasons: 20, 30, 20, and 30?

30 goals for Stafford is a strong season; 20 is weak. My answer is that, yes, I would take those per-season goal totals. I can tolerate the 20s if he reaches 30 at least twice over the term of the contract. Some people, when asked, would tell me they need more from him. That’s perfectly fine. He did score 31 goals in sixty-two games last season. An argument can certainly be made that Stafford should be a reliable 30 goal scorer for the length of his contract.

As the season developed, it became clear he wasn’t trending to reach 30. At first, I was patient. He’s a streaky scorer and maybe this would just be a 20 goal season for him. But he wasn’t trending to reach 20 either. He scored 9 goals in his first fifty-six regular season games in 2011-2012.

So I had to wonder — would he be salvageable if he finished with only 15 goals this season? And how could I have misjudged him so badly? What’s gone wrong for him?

I based my justification for the Stafford contract (in fact I advocated for it) around a belief in his shot. Most of Stafford goals, prior to last season were scored off rebounds and loose pucks around the net. He would box out the defender and use his quick hands to get his 15 goals annually. Last year was different; he still scored around the net but last year Stafford also routinely beat goaltenders with his wrist shot. He was a dangerous scorer who played with a lot of confidence and who seemed to always be skating hard. In transition, he would either drive hard to the net or let a wrist shot go. Both were effective.

Stafford skated hard early in the season. I vividly remember the follow-up game against the Bruins, the first after Lucic collided with Miller. Stafford was the all over the ice — skating hard and creating chances. He had seven shots on goals that game (tied for his season-high) but no goals. For Stafford, the only measure that really matters is the number of goals he scores. The Sabres don’t rely on him to provide energy. They have other players for that. They need Stafford to score and he was unable to convert on any of his scoring opportunities in that game. The Sabres lost, 4-3 in a shoot-out.

That’s essentially been the story with Stafford all year. Great scoring chances — no one has had more — but not enough finish. As the goals became more and more infrequent, so did the hard skating. He lost his confidence.

The break-away chance last Wednesday against the Canadiens fits this point I’m trying to make on Stafford’s skating. He was at the end of his shift but I really would have liked to see him put his head down and dig in for a few strides to get a little separation. Instead he coasted. Desharnais gave a great effort and was able to catch Stafford from behind. That play infuriated me and not because I thought it should have resulted in a minor penalty. I appreciated what was at stake. If he scores in that sequence, the Canadiens are in a deep hole. That goal would have been huge. Two goal deficit. Instead, Carey Price wasn’t even tested. How can Stafford allow himself to be checked in that situation? It honestly frustrates me now to remember how charged up I was over that moment because I know to feel that strongly means that I have very little faith in the other forwards ability to create and finish scoring opportunities. I know what Stafford is — a forward who is struggling to finish — but the Sabres offense depends on him.

Think about it. Brad Boyes is a zero. Thomas Vanek has disappeared. Cody Hodgson is still trying to find his way. Jason Pominville is busy trying to squeeze some production out of Derek Roy and Ville Leino. The goals need to come from somewhere.

Tyler Ennis, I’m convinced, can play well with anyone but he seems to really like Stafford. When they combine for a goal, Ennis is never more animated. Instead of his normal Sonic the Hedgehog curl-and-roll celebratory posture, Ennis leaps into Stafford’s arms. He’s happy for Stafford when he scores and he seems to enjoy his own goals more when Stafford is on the ice. That’s important, I think. Chemistry.

In the last month, playing alongside Ennis seems to have rejuvenated Stafford’s season. There’s really no question about it. Ennis has made Stafford’s line much more effective in transition and it was the Sabres transition — combined with some timely saves from Miller — that beat the Rangers last night.

Hopefully, Stafford is starting to regain a little bit of his confidence. He’s scored a few goals with his wrist shot from mid-range recently. That’s a promising sign. Attacking the net hard is something I’d still like to see a bit more of from him. In the meantime, there are questions to consider.

20 goals — Stafford? He’s at 17 now. Can he get there? Seven games remain. Can he get to 20 — the arbitrary round number I set at the start of the season as the minimum? And if he does reach 20, what will that mean?

More importantly, can he continue to help carry the offense in the aftermath of Vanek’s obvious but still undisclosed injury? Will he be able to do enough for the offense to get the Sabres into the playoffs?

This is how it ends:

The surest way to beat teams like the Capitals, Penguins, Maple Leafs, and Flyers is to score a bunch of goals (I’m half serious).

The Sabers can keep the Wild and Bruins off the scoreboard, or at least limit their offense. But most of the Sabres remaining opponents are (1) carried by their offensive-forwards and (2) are relatively weak, as a team, at goal prevention. The Sabres offense needs to keep pace and hope they get a few timely saves from Miller.

Offensively, Pominville is still the main guy for them. He’s been so reliable. Next is Ennis. No one has been better lately. Third is probably Stafford. The numbers are convincing. 7 goals in the last fourteen games. 12 points in the last six.

If Stafford disappears, I don’t like the Sabres chances of making the post-season. I really don’t think they can make it without him. Somehow, that seems fitting.

* * *

If you are someone who has spoken with me about the Sabres in the last few months, you might have heard me explain how difficult I find it to remain hopeful with Regier. His mistakes continue to pile up and I often wonder if he’s learned from any of them. Sometimes it seems like he has but every day the contenders he helped build seem more and more fleeting.

Management became a subject of conversation very quickly in the season — as soon as it became clear Ville Leino was not a long-term solution at the center position. Sometimes, we would talk about team toughness. Other times, we would talk about player injuries. Through it all, we talked about Regier. I make an effort to try and avoid getting too caught up in the conversations that temporarily swirl around the Sabres, like the who-should-start-in-goal-next-game and the did-you-hear-what-person-x-said type of stuff, but there was no escaping the Regier talk.

In the weeks leading up to the trade deadline, I think my opinion of Regier was lower than it has ever been.

The root of my concern with Regier was not and is not the visible mistakes sprinkled across his teams over the years. I don’t dismiss any of his mistakes, they routinely bum me out when I watch the Sabres play, but I don’t worry about those kinds of mistakes as much as I had in the past (even two or three months ago in the past).

My concern with Regier is now based mostly on the way he manages. He can’t stand behind the sensibility of patience while warning against the pitfalls of impulse anymore. My approval of him depends heavily on exactly how aggressive he tries to improve the roster. I worry that Regier’s style might not fit the new Sabres and that he may be unwilling or unable to adapt. I need for him to be a proactive manager going forward. That’s the word I keep settling on: proactive. Pegula’s resources allow for Regier to make proactive decisions. If Regier cannot meet this expectation, then he should be replaced.

Top salary teams — the ones that contend for and win championships — address problems at their early stages. They don’t wait for internal solutions. Sometimes (often) they make mistakes but the greatest benefit of having more support and a greater supply of resources than the competition is that it’s easier to recover from mistakes.

This wasn’t just another #DarcyDoSomething period in his tenure with the Sabres. A new question arose — is Regier capable of becoming the right type of manager for this type of ownership? July 1 was about allocating resources and committing to present assets. That was a great day. We learned about both ownership and management on July 1. February 27 was about rearranging resources through a simple trade in which a young asset with significant potential was moved off the roster. I think it’s fair to say we learned something about the management from this trade. Trading Kassian, more so than acquiring Hodgson, suggests to me that weaknesses will be addressed and treated with more urgency than they have been in the past.

I’m comfortable with Regier as the manager moving forward. I’ll support him as he, hopefully, continues to address problem areas by flipping replaceable parts. But he needs to make a contender out of what he has and fast. Otherwise, no matter how proactive his actions are, he will get buried by the public for his team failures.

* * *

The current players on Sabres, meanwhile, are making a late push for the playoffs. They have thirteen games remaining — about four weeks worth of hockey. I think they can probably afford to lose three maybe four more games in regulation. Their odds of qualifying are long but they’re one of the few teams playing well.

I first needed a sign. That was step one. I needed something to quell my concerns about the Sabres management strategy. Zack Kassian is no longer in the system. Cody Hodgson is now on the roster. Step two was winning enough games to get back in the race. Their record in 8-3-1 in the last 12 games and 13-5-3 over the last 21. Step three, the easiest, was relapsing into my most natural identity. Now that I don’t have to be so analytical about the team in-between games, I’m able to resume thinking like a fanatical lunatic again.

What this last month of regular season hockey represents is a test with a high degree of difficulty. If they pass, it will feel like last year. But I don’t want to get too ahead of the circumstances. The Sabres still have a lot of games remaining.

It’s a bizarre spot the Sabres have put their fans in. They were a lousy hockey team for about 45-50 games this season. Yet they have an opportunity to get in the playoffs if they win a few games, an achievement that most thought was totally unattainable. If they qualify, they would be inviting fans to suspend disbelief even further and commit to the idea that this team, this deeply flawed team for the majority of the season, could upset a few favorites.

Two weeks ago I called the remaining games in the season ‘exhibition games’ and now I can’t wait for each one to start. It’s not within me to ignore this. I’m doing the math. I’m checking schedules and in-game scores. I check the standings so often that I’ve memorized the point totals and number of games-remaining for each team the Sabres are competing against.

It’s like smelling barbecue. I can’t really describe it any other way. There’s something primal that happens to me when I smell slow cooked ribs. Playoffs are in the air. I can’t resist thinking about the playoffs.

There are at least one-million reasons why Jason Pominville won’t be the one to lift the trophy at the end of the post-season but it takes only one reason — qualifying for the tournament — to get me aware of the possibility.

Derek Roy and Paul Gaustad were widely considered as the Sabres two most likely trade candidates but for very different reasons. Roy’s largely unproductive season, coupled with how the Sabres seem to play with him out of the line-up, makes him expendable in the opinion of many. Gaustad’s contract is expiring at the end of the season.

Everyone enjoyed imagining what kind of return each would yield in an exchange but I could never marry the idea of improving the center position with the idea of trading both Roy and Gaustad. It never made sense to me how, at the end of the day, the Sabres would be stronger down the middle without Roy and Gaustad, the Sabres only two natural centers.

The weakness at center is a topic that has become somewhat tiresome to discuss. The Sabres have needed help at this position for years. It’s been a problem for so long that as newer problems emerged, the inadequacies at center became something of an after-thought. But with the pressing reality of Gaustad’s contract, the lack of depth at the center position loomed not as a troublesome weakness but as an alarming limitation.

The big news of the trade deadline day was that the Sabres were able acquire Cody Hodgson, a promising center in his first full NHL season with the Canucks; and they didn’t give up Derek Roy to get him. Hodgson is young and has what seems like a lot of potential. Awesome. A significant number of Canucks fans are disappointed with the trade which makes me think there’s a lot to like about Hodgson.

On paper there’s a lot of symmetry between Cody Hodgson, now, and Tim Connolly when he first became a member of the Sabres organization. Like Hodgson, Connolly was a highly regarded center, drafted and developed outside of the organization, who the Sabres acquired early in his career. It was as if all of the sudden Connolly was here and he was the future. We expected a lot from Tim Connolly. We’re going to expect a lot from Cody Hodgson.

I don’t want to just open this comparison and then move away from it so let me say a few things about Connolly. His legacy in Buffalo will revolve around the games he missed. In the final years of his career in Buffalo, his contract status and a throw-away line from the general manager (two of the top-20 centers in the NHL) poisoned his reputation. It’s a shame because Connolly was about as talented of a playmaker as I’ve ever seen in a Sabres uniform. I’ll never forget him. He’s going to be someone I measure future centers against.

I don’t know much about Hodgson’s playing style. From what I’ve read, he seems more like a finisher than Connolly. If he scores two more goals this season, he’ll match Connolly’s career single season high. I do know he’s going to look like Connolly. Hodgson is wearing number 19 and has almost identical body measurements. It’s going to take some time to adjust.

Hodgson is a long-term investment but he immediately provides balance to the roster. With Hodgson on the team, two more scoring wingers get to play alongside a legitimate center. The Sabres now have two forward lines of scorers all playing in their natural positions.

And for Regier — high marks. He was proactive and that’s really what I wanted most out of him on this day. Regier certainly got great value in return for an average veteran player on the final year of a contract. But packaging Zach Kassian and Marc-Andre Gragnani, two young and inexpensive players with high upside, was a totally different type of trade and one that Regier is historically reticent to make. Here’s what Elliotte Friedman had to say.

I’ll admit to a man-crush with Cody Hodgson’s game, so I’m not the best person to properly evaluate the Vancouver/Buffalo trade. That, and I haven’t seen a ton of Zack Kassian. But contacted several NHL types to ask their thoughts, I was amazed by the wildly divergent opinion. There was no consensus. For everyone who liked Hodgson, there was someone who questioned whether he really is a top-six forward. For everyone who said that Kassian’s got Milan Lucic written all over him, there was someone who said he’s not in Lucic’s league.

There’s a lot of risk associated with the Kassian/Gragnani trade. To make that trade, Regier is partially admitting the Leino at center experiment has not worked out as planned. The Sabres are committed to Leino and with Gaustad’s contract expiring, the circumstances were right for this risk. Kassian has more value for the Sabres than he does for most franchises because the Sabres are so undersized. The Canucks are a similarly undersized team that evidently places an equally high value on what Kassian may provide. They were able to pull him away from the Sabres by offering something the Canucks have in excess that partially fills a big need for the Sabres.

Moving Kassian and Gragnani represents both an awareness of a problem and an effort to address the problem. It’s hardly a surprise to learn Regier is aware the Sabres are thin in talent at the center position. He’s not an idiot. It was shocking to learn how much he’s willing to pay to address this weakness. It’s a big statement from Regier.

Beyond that, the only other comment I want to make is that Hodgson was born in 1990 and grew up in a town north of Toronto. This makes him a fan of the Sundin-era Maple Leafs which makes him perfect for the Sabres. It’s like the University of Michigan having recruited some of their most accomplished football players out of high schools in Ohio. Or, a better example, Paul Pierce growing up in California as a great Lakers supporter only to be drafted by be Celtics and, of course, becoming one of the franchise’s all-time greats.

Toronto is probably going to miss the playoffs again this season but they’ll be a part of the picture in the coming years. And now here’s Hodgson — the adopted son of Canada after the 2009 world juniors tournament, born in the heart of Leaf-nation — wearing blue and gold. It’s just a delightful little story-line. It’s Shakespearian. How can he not work out? How can he not rip the hearts out of Toronto?

I’m looking forward to it.

The ceiling for this season is mediocrity. A mediocre season, for this franchise right now, is a lost season. Drag to Recycle Bin. Right-click Recycle Bin. Empty Recycle Bin.

Today, on trade deadline day, contenders will try to improve their roster in the short-term. It’s the last opportunity to do so before the post-season begins which makes everything seem extremely urgent from the outside. Players on expiring contracts will be traded from mediocre and bad teams to contenders in exchange for futures. It’s all great fun.

Surely, Sabres management understands by now that they’re not contenders. They’re not short-term buyers. No trade is going to magically improve their record, fix all their problems and make them into contenders this season. Whenever it was that Sabres management came to this realization — months, weeks or days ago — they should have begun to explore long-term adjustments. The Sabres need to make adjustments that impact the long-term construction of the roster.

* * *

In the past few days I’ve been noticing more and more discussion relating to the possibility of salvaging the season or making a late push for and into the playoffs. The Sabres have a record of 8-3-3 in their last 14 games. They’re within range. Despite all the losses, all the injuries and all the missed opportunities, they’re within range of a qualifying spot in the post-season. This seems so unlikely and it can make you doubt all the conclusions drawn from games earlier in the season.

Let’s put this recent stretch of games in its proper context. The months of November, December, and January overshadow the last 14 games. They needed wins in November; instead they gave away leads at home. They needed wins in December; instead their effort was routinely poor. They needed wins in January; instead their offense disappeared. I found it surprising to learn how quickly so many people were able to minimize what happened in the months prior. I don’t see anyone dancing in the streets about the Sabres playoff potential but some people are starting to wonder and perhaps even doubt what they had previously thought of the team.

Don’t be fooled.

I don’t think there’s anything salvageable about this season. I think it’s beyond recovery. I think it’s too late. There are twenty games still to play but they’re essentially exhibition games as far as this Sabres fan is concerned.

This is an unfamiliar outlook for me. I like to think of myself as something of an optimist when it comes to the Sabres. I’m not thinking playoffs and the fact that I’m not makes me unoptimistic.

I’m not totally sure why I find myself so detached. Maybe it’s the familiarity of so many of the characters associated with the Sabres. Maybe the investment the Sabres made on players has made me less tolerant of mediocrity from the team.

My frustration is directed at the predictable list of players. My exasperation is reserved for manager Darcy Regier.

I need for Regier to show me he’s become a more proactive manager. He has resources and he has a team that, at best, is mediocre. Frankly, I’m not convinced that Regier will do anything proactive today. I’m not convinced he will be proactive enough in the off-season.

This leaves me in a very uncomfortable position with Regier and one that fans like me will want to revisit once the season is finished. For now, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. I’ll wait. I’ll make an effort to be rational. I’m not sure anything he does today will have much of an impact beyond temporarily affecting a Regier’s approval rating.

Once the deadline passes and the exhibition games are finished, the general manager position is one that will need to be revisited. The NHL’s trade deadline is today but Darcy’s deadline is still ahead. Time is running out.

This has had a profound effect on how the majority of Buffalo sports fans evaluate Buffalo sports teams, particularly for the older generations. I’ve been thinking a lot about how to best articulate this for a bit and, well, here it goes. I think, as a collective, Buffalo is unusually vigilant for any competitive shortcomings — both on the playing surface and in the executive offices. I estimate that Buffalo recognizes the signs quicker than most sports localities. The slightest hint of dysfunction will cause us to express extreme measures of frustration. Even the teams that seem like they might be working well are met with a lot of skepticism. This is balanced, somewhat, with the high degree of approval that Buffalo tends to express upon identifying something or someone that seems like should work.

Terry Pegula inherited this audience of lunatics when he purchased the Sabres. To Buffalo sports fans, he represents something very unfamiliar in a professional sports owner. It’s almost as if Pegula has inverted Buffalo’s little sports world. Our perspective and preferences are represented at the decision-making level unlike ever before. The hands-off, bottom-line type of sports owner hasn’t won a championship here and up until Pegula we’ve never had any kind of alternative. I think we’re all pretty eager to see how successful a Buffalo sports franchise can be with a fan in charge.

* * *

One year ago from this upcoming Wednesday, Terry Pegula introduced himself to Buffalo. He spoke soft and slow — uncomfortable with all the attention. He smiled like a goofball in his black suit, a tiny Sabres logo pinned to his lapel. He took the time to introduce everyone in his family with a blend of pride and tenderness. He cried like a star-struck nine-year-old.

And just like that Buffalo was sold. It’s easy to understand why. The sensation that Terry Pegula and his message created on his day was positive by any measure. Everything about it was intoxicating. He convinced us all that the Sabres would have every opportunity to eventually, one day, win a championship.

All that positive energy and momentum brought enormous pressure for the Sabres to make progress on the ice. Expectations have grown but mostly that pressure comes from a crazed desire to see this work. We really want it to work. And it’s not working yet.

* * *

There is still a sense that he, Pegula, is one of the people. It feels like he’s one of us. This is a powerful position to be in as an owner of a sports franchise and one that he should make an effort to preserve.

Tom Golisano is charged as an owner who never related to the people and wouldn’t invest enough money on personnel to win it all. Ralph Wilson, I think most would agree, is viewed as an owner who can be flat-out condescending to the people and is a notoriously petty decision maker.

Pegula hasn’t been around long enough to prove himself as a shrewd sports owner. We know he’s capable of delegating. He’s financially committed to the product. He’s engaged in the day-to-day. But he hasn’t had to make any difficult choices that speak to his patience or vision.

* * *

In his effort to make it work, Pegula will inevitably encounter resistance in the form of low approval ratings. We can and will surely tell him he’s making or has made a mistake. This is our prerogative. It’s what fans do. We yell and scream and stomp and point fingers and then eventually something comes along that meets our approval and refreshes our outlook.

Pegula has been a lead character in the news cycle for one full year but now, should he decide to retain Darcy Regier and Lindy Ruff beyond this season, he’ll be acting in opposition to the strategic preference of the majority for the first time.

We’ll soon begin to hear a lot of I-told-you-so refrains. We’ll hear about the complacency from past ownership and the new symmetries Pegula has drawn. We’ll hear about tolerating mediocrity. We’ll hear about an irrational degree of loyalty.

Most of that, depending on how things play out, will be accurate but only if the delivery is on point. I don’t like the imperative nature a lot of these arguments are made with but I get it. It was only a matter of time before Pegula began getting treated more like an owner and less like an extension of the fans

As soon as in the next few days even, I predict we’re going to hear and read a lot of people try to reassure the fans that Pegula is a capable owner who will improve through experience. But this is not the message we need to hear.

There is nothing wrong with Pegula becoming more like an owner. I think everyone is okay with that so long as he keeps from becoming any less of a fan.

Here’s Wyshynski briefly recapping:

Why was Tim Thomas’s snub of the White House news?

Was it because of his political differences with the current administration? His disdain for the direction of the country? His awkward capitalization on Facebook declarations of faith?

No. It was news because it may have embarrassed his employer, an NHL team, and affected his relationship with his teammates on the Boston Bruins. It was a hockey story.

I think that’s fair. It certainly was a hockey related story. But it wasn’t just a hockey story. It was gossip material, similar but not identical to the kind that circles Hollywood-type celebrities.

To close the piece, regarding Thomas’ latest political comment, Wyshynski wonders, “Why should we care?” Well, so what if we care? Wyshynski doesn’t seem to care, which is fine, but he also doesn’t seem to understand why anyone else would care.

At this time, with the White House thing still fresh is everyone’s mind, anything political that Tim Thomas says on his Facebook page will instantly become news. It doesn’t matter whether or not it advances the original story. There’s a market for celebrity gossip and this absolutely falls within the market’s parameters.

* * *

Let me ask you, stranger of the Interwebs, why do you think Deadspin exists? Sports news without access, favor, or discretion — this is their mission. I think Deadspin is successful because they publish what’s extraordinary and unexpected. Sometimes their content is funny. Sometimes it’s disturbing. Sometimes it’s sensational.

Deadspin, more than any other sports media outlet, has been able to capitalize on the public’s interest in the personal lives of sports figures. The sports media climate has changed thanks in large part to the rise of social media but Deadspin deserves some credit too. They make their impact not with credibility but with legitimizing visuals. Often, readers are given the source material directly. We see the photographs, watch the videos, and read the emails. Traditional sports reporters present their content differently and under tighter margins. But now that powerful outlets like Deadspin have emerged and are willing to release even the most explicit details of the personal lives of sports figures to the public, traditional commentariats have no choice but to consume and address these revelations.

I thought this quote, taken from a piece on Patrick Kane by Deadspin’s Barry Petchesky, articulates the outlet’s internal attitude well.

“PK pops up a lot here at Deadspin, and we’ve been accused of unfairly targeting him. That comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of our coverage. We aren’t vilifying his adventures; we’re glorifying them.”

That’s a very gentle overview of what Deadspin does to athletes like Kane but let’s examine what Petchesky is saying.

First, can Deadspin’s coverage of someone like Kane technically be called a glorification considering it’s also a profitable editorial strategy? What does it mean to glorify someone? Players are glorified when teams retire numbers and hang banners. Do bare-chested photographs captured inside of limousines belong in the same category? I think a better word to use in this instance is ‘celebrate’. Deadspin celebrates Kane’s behavior more than they can be credited with glorifying anything. They celebrate Kane’s night out with a public display in the way the NHL celebrates a player’s productive season by offering him a spot in the All-Star game.

But let’s consider the fundamental misunderstanding that Petchesky notes. Catching a sports figure in a private moment can be and should be viewed favorably, Deadspin would like everyone to believe. On this, I agree with Petchesky; most of what Deadspin does should be consumed favorably as it is totally harmless and inconsequential by almost any measure. I also think Deadspin‘s content is best served to a very tolerant audience — one who doesn’t look beyond the humor in attempt to uncover some sort of subtext. If you’re offended by Deadspin’s content you’re almost certainly old, bigoted, boring or some combination of the preceding.

What’s also interesting about Deadspin is that they generally refrain from posting any serious criticism informed by and based on expectations. They don’t express a lot of judgment either. What could Deadspin judge a sports figure against anyway? Deadspin has no ground to stand on. There’s not a lot of acclaim that appears on Deadspin’s pages. In the Daulerio era of Deadspin, has there been a single instance where a writer identified a sports figure as a swell guy, unironically? Again who are they to judge? They know who they are.

Traditional outlets of journalism are expected to judge their subjects through reasoned commentary. Those outlets are based on the idea that there is some standard for decency both professionally and personally but especially personally. They use discretion. This puts them in a really difficult position when a sports figure they cover gets caught in what’s institutionally considered an ethically compromising position.

They can’t respond favorably to these incidents, no matter how minor. They can’t explicitly support what society’s majority regards as ignorant or irresponsible. The trouble is, after a certain point in the timeline, they can’t ignore it either. They eventually have to ask the appropriate questions to the appropriate parties and, later, when they address it in their content, are practically forced to express a degree of contempt.

And this, I think, is what Wyshynski is responding to when confronted with this latest chapter in Thomas’ political story. He doesn’t want this coverage. He doesn’t want to hear someone pass judgment on a statement that Thomas made on his Facebook page. He expresses frustration with the decision to treat this as if it were an interesting twist to the story of Thomas’ politics. It doesn’t matter whether or not it’s progress to the overall story (it’s not); people find it interesting regardless.

 * * *

Wyshynski asks why should we care since the latest news fails to move the larger story forward. The better question is why, exactly, do we care considering the latest news fails to move the larger story forward. The former is a stupid question because the reality is we do care. Why should we care who Jennifer Aniston is dating? I don’t know, but we do. I don’t have a good answer to the latter but that doesn’t mean I think the interest people have in celebrity gossip is misplaced or excessive.

Deadspin, and the type of sports related content they’re known for publishing, is not for everyone. But everyone should be capable of recognizing and acknowledging its appeal.

Tim Tebow is a polarizing figure. What I find most interesting about Tim Tebow isn’t what makes him polarizing — the unconventional quarterbacking style and commitment to his theological beliefs — it’s that he has become polarizing. The reaction to Tebow is a lot more interesting than even his most compelling qualities.

Recently, Tim Thomas’ reputation underwent a similar transformation. Thomas is a sensational hockey goaltender who also, apparently, happens to be a politically charged American. He got the web buzzing after making a decision to express part of his political orientation. The circumstances of that choice — the high profile stage, the timing, the Facebook note — are mostly uninteresting but the reaction from the public has been absolutely fascinating.

It always surprises me the degree to which an athlete can force us to confront a social or economic issue. More than any other category of celebrity, athletes have a way of revealing unresolved tensions within the public.

We’re constantly reevaluating athletes based on their athletic performance. Sometimes athletes are measured by more than just ability. When this occurs the conversation tends to drift into one of tolerance. The big picture question for every polarizing athlete is one of tolerance.

* * *

I admire athletes for their physical ability. Those are not just empty words. I understand how hard they must train and the sacrifices they must make in order to reach the professional level. Athletes impress me; they impress me all time. The skill they demonstrate, the stories they craft — it can be a remarkable viewing experience. What athletes do and say in-between games can, if you let it, detract from this experience.

I’m always reluctant to set any expectations for the behavior of an athlete outside of a competitive environment for many reasons but mostly because they’re always based on appearances and surface truths. Shouldn’t it take more to know a person? Wouldn’t it take more to know you?

I’m not trying to sell anyone on the idea that what athletes say and do inside the public’s sphere of observation is totally irrelevant to the games. But I do think from time to time we need to remind ourselves that — and pardon the cliché — athletes are people. People are complicated and can have complex motives in life. And they’re diverse and they’re full of surprises. We should all respect each other’s story. We should respect the blank spaces.

That I will never fully understand Tim Tebow or Tim Thomas in their time as professionals is not disappointing or at all bothersome to me. I don’t need to understand an athlete to appreciate his work. All an athlete like Tebow or Thomas will ever ask from me is my attention; they have it, without condition, for as long as they compete at the professional level.

Eventually, I learned that the actual behavior of polarizing athletes was much less consequential, in a direct sense, than the breadth of the reaction would otherwise suggest. Are we out of problems? Polarizing athletes like Tebow and Thomas are harmless. Again, it’s about tolerance; tolerance from us, the public. Are you tolerant of this behavior from a person you don’t fully understand – the sports world routinely asks us. Nevermind that this person is a legitimate stranger. Please provide your answer by an explicit show of support or criticism. This is what we do.

“The Top 50 Albums of 2011 are sourced from 403 bloggers’ personal Top 10 lists and weighted according to their ranking.”

Some of the more notable albums included are Tune Yards’ W H O K I L L, Decemberists’ King Is Dead, Adele’s 21, Radiohead’s The King of Limbs, Shabazz Palaces’ Black Up, Jay Z & Kanye West’s Watch the Throne, Fiest’s Metals, Lady Gaga’s Born This Way, Drake’s Take Care, The Roots’ Undun, The Weeknd’s House of Balloons, and The Black Keys’ El Camino.

Higher on the list, ahead of all the albums I just mentioned, placing third in HM’s top 50 of 2011, is an album by M83 named Hurry Up, We’re Dreaming. By a wide margin, the track with the most traction on Hurry Up, We’re Dreaming is “Midnight City.”

I don’t remember my first impression of “Midnight City.” Evidently, it struck me as a song to pass over. Then mix and mash artists wore it out. When the mix and mash artists sink their talons into a song, it’s usually a sign to stay away. I stayed away and, to be honest, the parts of “Midnight City” I heard reminded me of my least favorite era of music: the early techno movement of the 1980s led by groups like Depeche Mode and Soft Cell.

When I saw that Hurry Up, We’re Dreaming had made it all the way up to the three spot, I decided to listen to the album in its entirety. I had to learn for myself why everyone was so impressed. Maybe I had blinders on. It turns out I was foolish for sleeping on M83. The album is great. I recommend it.

As for “Midnight City,” my appreciation for it has grown too. I needed to listen to it in its entirety a few times. ”Midnight City” is a song built around a powerful four note, synth-metal arrangement. At first, I didn’t find the presentation of the melody very appealing in the first-half of the song and I’m still not too crazy about it. I probably would have skipped past and never heard the second-half of the song if I had I only ever came upon “Midnight City” while listening to something like a Spotify playlist. Fortunately, my patience is much greater when I listen to full albums. When I commit to listening to an album, I prefer to hear each track from beginning to end, in sequence, uninterrupted. Had I not seen Hurry Up, We’re Dreaming on HM’s list of top 50 albums of 2011, I would have never heard the saxophone in the second-half of “Midnight City.”

A French musician named Anthony Gonzales does all the composition work for M83. He doesn’t use traditional melodic instruments very often in his music, or at least he doesn’t in Hurry Up, We’re Dreaming. Its sound is nebulous; it’s highly synthetic; it’s a lot of softly layered voices over powerful percussion. It might be a pop album if it weren’t for the series of trans-meditative tracks that interplay between the power ballads. I love how Ian Cohen of Pitchfork describes these breaks.

“While many of them stand as intriguing meditations on their own merits, they reinforce Hurry Up’s intentions to be an immersive universe– check in whenever you want, but the magic’s in the exploratory phases.”

The exploratory phase in “Midnight City” is fantastic:

A singer wails, “waiting for a car/waiting for a ride in the dark.” The melody whines. Synthetic snares and symbols thump and hiss dimly. A saxophone arrives and solos aimlessly — an unexpected but distinctive sound that leads the moment it becomes audible.

I consider the song’s ending necessary in order to fully appreciate its beginning. I like to think the melody was designed for the background — a background in which an instrument like the saxophone can float to the front. The scene is a city at the midnight hour. Neon signs, skyline, flashing movement — all are part of the lyrical imagery. Sonically, I chose to allow the melody to represent the city; it’s slightly irritating, maybe a little uncomfortable, and probably a little too strong, especially initially. The beauty can be found by surveying the entire package, specifically how the song builds then slips to the background so as to allow something distinct to emerge in the forefront. The saxophone and its timing doesn’t just fit within the constructs of the song — it’s perfect for the song.

It took me a while to recognize this. A three-minute prelude to a single minute of what, judged independently, is probably an unremarkable couple of bars of saxophone. But together, layered, it works almost effortlessly. The song is nearly finished by the time the missing part is added and suddenly it all snaps into place.

* * *

How long before the Sabres find a saxophone?