All Activity
- Past hour
-
She didn't follow Phil Collins' advice.
-
The offseason so far - Are the Sabres better?
Pimlach replied to GASabresIUFAN's topic in The Aud Club
I must be blind because I didn’t see much bad body language or attitude from Peterka. Maybe some I’m the last two weeks which I chalked up to being sick of losing. He had a strong start, then he cooled off, and then he was pretty steady despite the constant line juggling, and the poorly coached power play, and playing in front of a goalie who’s confidence was shot. The team under Ruff played 3/4 of the season as if they didn’t know each other. Yet Peterka was a steady contributor. -
I don’t have a problem with reupping Byram. The problem is Adams is in year 6 and hasn’t built a team that is competing for anything. There franchise player went in last year and said this is unacceptable and Adams assured him of a plan to improve. Adams gave a multi day presentation to the owner with a plan to improve. All the coaches are back because they are under contract. You gave up Peterka for Kesserling and Doan. I like those players but this team isn’t better. It hasn’t made strides to leap into playoff contention. This should be a GM fighting for his job. Taking big swings. But this offseason is the same as last years which wasn’t close to good enough.
-
The offseason so far - Are the Sabres better?
Thorny replied to GASabresIUFAN's topic in The Aud Club
Not only bad but “bad and refuses to change his play”. Ok. Uncoachable I guess. -
The offseason so far - Are the Sabres better?
pi2000 replied to GASabresIUFAN's topic in The Aud Club
JJP was fine defensively, was a +2 team relative plus/minus. You want to allow fewer goals? Trade Quinn and Malenstyn, they were a combined -34! -
The offseason so far - Are the Sabres better?
Pimlach replied to GASabresIUFAN's topic in The Aud Club
I’m tired of the “Peterka is bad at defense” story. He is 23, and he is a goal scorer, and an emerging star player. Peterka is bad at defense just like almost every other player that came up the Sabres development path. Granato did not teach an NHL system, and Adams did not support his young players with his &hity methods of roster building. Peterka didn’t get along with Ruff. Something happened. Oh well. But I get the feeling Ruff is gone in a year and Peterka will be Sam Reinhart-lite on another team. -
I believe your Peterka projection is way too high. Signing Bo is best case scenario cuz our GM sucks. You get a competent partner for Dahlin for two years & his worst case scenario is his cap hit is low enough that it's very tradeable. Given the current blue line structure, this makes a ton of sense. Ok to disagree with roster construction, but it is what it is.
- Today
-
Peterka had a positive plus minus and a positive team relative plus minus. The idea that he was a defensive liability is simply not true. He plays defense better than most 23 year old 30 goal scorers. You're not just losing his 30 goals next season, you're losing his 40, 45, 50 goal seasons.... yes 50, he will score 50 at some point. To trade him as an RFA for a middling defenseman is criminal and in no way shape or form makes the team better. The actual defensemen are not the problem. The commitment to play sound team defense is... for both defensemen and forwards. The problem is the construction of the team. KA ices the youngest roster in the league and then acts annoyed that they can't keep the puck out of their net. I posted about this a few months ago... there's a massive correlation between average team age and goals against.. and it's been this way for as far back as they keep those statistics. You want to make the playoffs Kevyn? Trade 5 or 6 youngsters (Kulich, Benson, Johnson, Rosen, Östlund, Helenius, etc....) packaging them for some proven vets. Problem is that his primary strategy is to only bring in players who "want to be here"... and there aren't many proven vets willing to waive to come here, so he whines about taxes and palm trees, when in reality, YOU Kevyn, are the reason, not taxes, not palm trees... but LOSING and having no real plan to improve.
-
Yeah, he isn't getting traded this summer. But by getting him in at under $7MM, they have an extra $750k to spend on that middle 6 (top 6 ideally, but the money they'll have left says middle 6) F the team desperately needs for when someone in the top 6 inevitably breaks or when one of the guys pencilled into the top 6 underperforms. So, not a building block transaction, but if it leaves enough cash to bring in something to improve, will take it. (Beggars can't be choosers.) And then, the D will have been improved, the F's might've improved, and the GT on paper isn't any worse. Round here that's a win, right? (Lord, please send that asteroid soon and take us all out of our misery.)
-
Right that’s what I’m saying: he’s not getting traded this summer People that are dreamily envisioning it as a building block transaction for something to improve this summer are mistaken - that’s what I’m saying (nm that being beyond Adams’ capacity) There wasn’t “more coming” after the JJ trade - it wasn’t the “first shoe”. remember? “I’ll judge the Peterka deal when we see what’s next” nothing was next . I’ll happily eat the shoe if there is - - -
-
Had they punted Wilford, would not only hope the D will be better with the changes, but would actually expect it. (Now, would those changes be enough to materially alter their results, no data, but it would legitimately be in the realm of possibilities.) As it is, with keeping Wilford, it is likely too little to materially make this a truly good D. So truly despise watching the D stand around unengaged in front of the goalie; but that isn't as bad has having both of them go behind the net to try to prevent the pass to the now wide open slotman.