Taro T

Forton needs to go. (Obviously Adams and others need to go too, but Jerry needs to leave the building.)

Yeah, he did his normal trope about how everyone needs to be better and he needs to be better, but at this point, all that was and is is merely words. The actions don't match. Personally, expect this team is ready to rejoin the NHL because there are actual NHLers at every spot and there are kids in Ra-cha-cha that have demonstrated they can handle playing in the NHL without getting caved in should callups be necessary. But, that's where they were 13/14 years ago at the time they decided to blow everything up. Don't expect they actually WILL join the NHL until Adams is gone. Hoping Christmas comes by NYD this year but by no means am expecting it.

Maybe they slide Benson to the 1st line, Quinn to the 2nd, and Doan to the 3rd in that scenario. Don't want Quinn out there with the rookie. The rookie has good hockey sense and is decent in his own end. Quinn, um, does not. And didn't say that McLeod line would be a shutdown line. Intentionally said checking line. They'll try and do a reasonable job of it, but they'll face top lines sometimes and will get beat in those situations; but don't expect they'd get their brains pounded in. And not sure that I'd agree that the 4th line in your version was a true shut down line either.

Excellent question. Win every game they can. PA will argue against this, but this team SHOULD win in Calgary. Additionally, they might win in Vancouver; they should be able to win in Seattle, but until they ever finally beat them will always expect that to be an L. Maybe we'll get lucky and they'll make that one a moral victory by only losing that one in OT. Know it won't happen, but would really like to see a bloodletting in the hockey department on Boxing Day (or whenever the roster / personnel freeze ends; and realize the FO and coaches don't get holiday job protection; but waiting 3 extra days to can them won't make any difference on this hockey season and if it lets folks have a good holiday with their families, why not). Find out what you have should Leone be the interim coach. (Or heck, let Appert be the interim coach to prove just how friggin' bad he is and keep him from getting the promotion to the job full time. Nah, on second thought, he might have a Rolston dead cat bounce and we'd be stuck with him for the next 5 years. Better to not risk it.) Let Kekelainen take the reins. And whomever Terry's advisor is (he's bouncing ideas off somebody's noggin or getting input lo these many years) make sure he's the 1st one sent packing (Forton perhaps?).

The same guy that is instructing them in HOW to play D is the same guy that was doing so when Granato was the coach. Granted, that guy's system when he gets adequate goaltending is actually GOOD on the PK (at least it has been through the 1st 1/3 of the season) which is something that wasn't apparent when he was getting below average goaltending. But it is, has been, and likely always will be horrible at 5v5. With Ruff only making 2 moves altering the coaching staff in 2 years (1 being demoting Ellis and elevating Appert, and the other being the canning of a S&C coach), totally get being disappointed in how they play in their own end, but when they're getting told by the same people what to do, it really is a bit on the Sabre fan side of things to expect anything different. Sure, hope for something different, but to expect it, so, so, very Sabrey. (And, yeah, had hoped things would change under Ruff and even expected them at the time he was hired, but since he didn't make any changes other than using line matchups when available at home, not much has changed. He does have them playing better to start games than his predecessor did, but even that's not a huge change this year as they're tied for giving up the most 1st goals of the game w/ the Phlyers. 18 times in 28 games.)

So, we now have nearly 4 games of Norris and all of them have been with Thompson on his wing. They were great in the 1 adrenaline game and have been bad in the other 3. When things were going well prior to Norris getting back in the lineup, Ruff had said he saw Thompson as his 1C and Norris as the 2C. Realize the sample size of them together has been very small, but this team has played its way into not having the luxury of letting the 1st line have 10 or so games to find itself and gel. So, IMHO (and likely most people's here) the time has come for Ruff to break those 2 up. Thompson and Tuch show a lot of chemistry with each other. Doan has played with Tuch a lot and has reasonable chemistry with him. IMHO there's your 1st line. Norris and Benson should have chemistry together. And, in the adrenaline game they did. (But pretty sure Norris would've had chemistry with people from here that day.) What winger to give them? Options are Zucker, Quinn, Östlund (yeah he's a C, he can slide), and Greenway. Personally am giving them Zucker as he's the best of the bunch. Now, who to play on McLeod's line? For now, would give him Östlund and Greenway or maybe see what Kozak gives you at W. Actually would like to see what Kozak gives at W. Don't want Quinn on this line as am planning on using it predominantly as a checking line and Quinn doesn't fit that bill. That McLeod and Östlund can contribute some O would be enough in that department, at least on an initial looksee at what we have. Which would leave Krebs and Malenstyn wtih either Greenway, Quinn, or Dunne. Give it to Greenway when he's available and Dunne when he isn't. Quinn hasn't really played his way out of a job, but last few games he hasn't exactly played his way into one either. Doan - Thompson - Tuch Benson - Norris - Zucker Östlund - McLeod - Kozak Greenway/Dunne - Krebs - Malenstyn

And have said it before, and at this point it really isn't a knock on Bryson, who is who he is and when not asked to do too much is actually playing well in that 7thD pressed into duty play, but want either Johnson or Novikov (or some other 7th guy that has a D-1st focus) in the lineup which does 2 things - 1 it gives Power a defensive partner to let him freewheel as much as he wants and more importantly, if Byram and Timmins aren't working, you can break Byram and Timmins up without having to take Samuelsson Dahlin apart and without giving Byram a partner he won't be able to be effective with. (If it isn't working with defensive 1st D-man Timmins, give him the other one, and let Timmins go bcak to playing with Power who did look good together earlier this year.)

If it were simply a binary choice of keep the current system or go back to no reviews at all, would likely reluctantly go to no reviews. But, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. Already said how this kid would fix the offside challenge. For goalie interference, wonder if something like adding a 2nd "crease" 18 inches (or whatever distance makes the most sense) outside the actual crease might allow them to make that a more cut and dried endeavor. ANY contact with the goalie or his equipment that is within the blue paint is goalie interference UNLESS the defenseman drove the offensive player into the blue paint OR the puck was uncovered inside the crease. If the offensive player was outside the yellow (or whatever color they choose) paint when the D made contact that drove the offensive player into the goalie then if he makes ANY effort at avoiding the goalie, it's a good goal. If that offensive player is in the yellow paint when the contact with the D begins then it's goalie interference. Simple. Might result in some plays that should've been interference to go uncalled and vice versa but its easy to implement and people will finally know again just what goalie interference is. Maybe you even enlarge the blue paint about 6" to allow for the goalie's glove being outside the blue paint when a stick or arm bumps against it impeding the movement which would bring a judgement call back into play. And you still can't intentionally check a goalie inside or outside the crease. Wouldn't that result in D-men intentionally checking F's into their goalie when he's inside that yellow paint? Well, it could. But D that start regularly breaking their goalies by running F's on top of them won't be long for this league. Just spitballin' that goalie interference idea. Hadn't really given much if any thought to how to fix that issue prior to this post. So, get to a spot where OBVIOUS missed calls are now fixed and close judgement calls are left to the refs' judgement.

Hoped he was going to be paired with Dahlin this year and actually look like a 4th OA pick. But Samuelsson has been so good with Dahlin, you can't break that up. And Byram just doesn't seem to click with anyone (else).

Sometimes it takes a while, but except for when he plays with Dahlin, Byram seems to have that effect on all his partners.

You sure about that? 23-24 PP% 16.6% 29th ranked - horrendously bad 22-23 PP% 23.4% 9th ranked - good 21-22 PP% 21.2% 16th ranked - average And that "good" year was the year that they had the best PP in the league by far for about 6 weeks, when people hadn't figured out Dahlin -> Thompson -> Blast -> (hopefully a) Goal was the ONLY trick they had in that bag. They were well over 30% in that stretch (IIRC it was over 35% then, but would have to look at more granualar data to verify that). Take that stretch out and they're as mediocre/bad as the other years.

Worked out in the Sabres favor, but yeah, the review process for offside plays is seriously flawed. Thing is, if they adjusted the review procedure to ONLY overturn OBVIOUS errors by doing something like only giving 30-60 seconds for the review and the play can only be slowed to 50% speed at MOST, we'd probably see leaguewide goal scoring go up (even more than just the now non-called back goals) because linesmen will be more willing to err on the side of letting a close play go rather than calling it back because a guy MIGHT have been in early.

This isn't on UPL. He hasn't given up any UPL Specials. But, on the flip side, except for the PS which the guy surpisingly didn't try to make a move on, UPL hasn't stolen anything. On Wednesday, when the Sabres were getting a push in the 2nd Ersson put that horseshoe firmly up his arse and robbed Doan with the skate blade save after giving up the monster rebound. UPL doesn't give the Sabres that. And a team with 0 regulation wins on the road two full months into the season that has only even gotten to OT on the road 4 times REALLY NEEDS the goalie to get one or 2 of those horseshoe up their arses saves. He got the 2 monster goalpost stops, but was cleanly beaten on both and teams don't get a boost from the other team hitting the post. Not like the boost they get when the goalie absolutely robs the other guy. 10 scoring chances against through 2 periods. 2 of those bounced off posts (and 1 needed to do the reverse 5 hole to keep from then going in after hitting the post) so UPL gave up a goal on 3 of 8 high danger chances (at most) that were actually on net and was cleanly beaten on 5 of the 10. He's played fine so far. But, there was no true "big save." And a team that stinks on the road, sadly, needs more than fine. Maybe you let him get the majority of the home starts because fine is actually fine the way they're playing at home but give most of the road starts to the other 2 guys who have on occassions given them the "big save" on the road.

Lucky bastage. 😉

Personally, wouldn't like to see teams get an extra timeout, but do agree a coach should be able to have 1 challenge when nothing too onerous happens should the challenge be wrong. Would go with, you can lose 1 challenge without getting a bench minor. IF you still have your TO, you lose it for a failed challenge. If you don't, then no harm no foul. Yeah, it might seem unfair, but unless a team has been REALLY bad early on, everybody is going to have their TO until at most least 5 minutes are left in the game. So, a 1st failed challenge will typically result in a lost TO, but not always. Who cares that all 1st failed challenges aren't identically onerous. Hockey GAMES aren't equally valuable - some games are worth 2 points and some are worth 3. A 2nd failed (and any subsequent) failed challenge is still a bench minor. And would have the league or an off-ice official review all plays that are close in the last 2-5 minutes in a game (not sure just how long). Personally would also like to see something to keep teams from calling a timeout and THEN challenging a call. That seems to be outside the spirit of the challenge.

Tonight's game will be interesting. Expecting UPL to get the start. Which will only be his 4th game on the road and only his 3rd start on the road. Both of the road starts, his SV% was well south of 0.850. In the Avs game, he only gave up 3 on 30 shots. Overall, he's 4-1-0 at home and 0-2-1 on the road. The Sabres as a whole tend not to play well on the road (well, no Schlitz, Sherlock). And just as they've fared slightly better at home with him bettween the pipes vs the outcomes with other 2 goalies, they've fared slightly worse on the road with him between the pipes vs the other 2 goalies. This is a game that will go a long way towards either showing the people that believe he is the best of the 3 (some even saying CLEARLY the best) are right or that those that believe he's at best in the mix with the other 2 and likely worse than either are right. Hoping for his and our sakes that those that believe he IS good (and not just that he may be good in the proper circumstances) are the ones that are correct. And if they shy away from giving him the start, that could be telling in itself as well.

Reasonable views of how they'd be deployed in both scenarios. But we all KNOW that Krebs will be the 4C and not Kozak.

This assessment is quite fair. The killer is, if you swap having 1 really good (like able to be in end of season awards conversations if the team had better coaching and could get into the mix of playoff teams) D-man and lots of Q's at G with having 1 really good G and lots of Q's at D; you'd be describing fairly accurately what the team was back when the current owner bought it excepting for the fact that the FO at that time had gotten the team to at least the semis on 4 occassions in about 16 years which was light years ahead of what their successors have done. So, 13 years have been thrown away to be exactly where they were when they decided to tank for a generational player who'd be available in the draft after the 2nd year of the tank. Kids that weren't alive when the decision to tank was made are now teenagers and there is not one single thing to show for having done so all so many years ago.

Oh, yes, the game reinforces the immaturity of the team and how, once again on this night, the coach made some inexplicable decisions which ended up playing into that immaturity. Which, yes, it can be read into, unfortunately, quite clearly. Meant to be more specific as to how, and how much, adding Norris will affect the trajectory of this squad. Just like we shouldn't be (and nobody around here is/was, not even remotely implying anyone was) assuming that the Sabres will be one of the best teams because of how good they looked against the Jets with Norris in the lineup; not sure that it's fair to expect them to be just as awful on the road as they have been without him. The way how the whole thing snowballed, would say we still don't know how much Norris will improve this roster. (Providing, obviously, if he stays healthy for a significant portion of the season at a minimum.)

Thompson reminds me a lot of a kid that was on my one son's teams very often (was a very good kid with a really nice family, so always grabbed him when he was available when picking our team); he was big and a little lanky like Thompson and had good speed and good hands. He was almost always our best F and he always wanted to play C, but oftentimes played him at W because ALL he thought about and cared about was scoring. He wanted nothing at all to do with coming back deep into our zone and that was one of the C's 1st assignments - take care of our end and you'll get plenty of chances at the other end. Thompson says he doesn't care if he's a C or a W but he definitely typically seems more engaged when he's a C than when he's a W; but he's better in the Sabres zone at W. If he's playing with a guy like Tuch who oftentimes takes the C's responsibilities in his own end, no issue with playing him at C. Maybe if they keep Norris with Tage, they can list Tage as the C but try to get to spots where when they're lining up for FOs it makes sense to have the lefty at the dot rather than the righty. Not fully ready to break up the experiment of Norris with Tage and Benson, but wouldn't give them too long a leash either.

Was wondering how much of the incredible play on Monday had been due to the overall team adrenaline from getting Norris back finally healthy after so long and how much of it was getting a true top 6 skater into the lineup. Hard to read too much into last night's game because of the way how that 2 minute or so streak of horrible decisions and a bit of bad puck luck torpedoed the night. But, though Norris did have a hand in the PP goal (didn't he get the 2nd assist on the Zucker goal?), his line didn't look special even before the wheels fell off and the Appert appears to be stronger than the Norris as the PP didn't do squat after they got that 1 PP goal and it was poor play by Thompson on the PP that started the ball rolling downhill. They moved the puck well on the PP that worked. They did a lot of standing around waiting for Dahlin or Byram to get the puck to Thompson or Norris for a 1 timer outside of that. Again, the Appert is strong with this crew. Tomorrow's game will be a better indication of what they'll really get with Norris in the lineup. Am wondering how long it takes before we see Ruff's revised original plan for how to deploy the lines with Norris in the lineup. (Aka Thompson and Norris each centering their own lines.)

Well, if home wins were 4 points and road wins only 1 point, that might get them pretty darn close. They have to have one of the better home records to go with the league worst road record.

Calgary. (Might even surprise us with the regulation W in Winnipeg too.)

Except he lost control of the puck before it was over the line. Unfortunately, upon review they made the correct call. And that's the risk of dragging the puck in behind yourself; if you lose it, you lose.

Reminds of the old joke. A young couple is thinking of getting married, but the young woman tells her soon to be fiancee that her parents are old fashioned and she wouldn't feel right agreeing to marry him if he didn't ask her father for her hand in marriage. So, the young man agrees to meet her father and ask him for his blessing of his intention to ask her to marry him. After he tells the father how much he loves his daughter and how he'll also be true to her and support her and love her and all that other rigamorole, the old man responds saying how he does see how much the young man loves his daughter and he'd like to give the couple his permission to marry, but first he needs to tell him that there's something he might not know about his daughter and it might temper the young man's enthusiasm to marry her. The young man assures him that there's nothing he could tell him that would make him change his mind about the love of his life but he does ask what this thing he should know about her. The old man says, sadly she has acute angina. The young man breathes a sigh of relief and shoots right back, oh, I already know that sir, and she has great tits too!