nfreeman

This is reasonable. OTOH, if someone cites prior experience X in support of proposed move Y, and X was actually a train wreck, I think it's fair to say that citing X hurts the argument holistically, even if X can be logically distinguished from Y based on a number of factors.

You're kinda alternating between using "pacing" to support your positions and denigrating the use of "pacing", innit? In any case, I don't think the NHL generally would view Cozens as a 1C, or pay him as such, especially since he's only produced real scoring numbers for 29 games. Again, my assumption was that he ends up the season at around 65 pts. That's not expensive 1C production, especially on an all-offense, zero-defense team. As for Dahlin, there are only 2 defensemen in the NHL making more than $9.6MM per year -- Karlsson and Doughty, both of whom signed huge contracts as established star defensemen. There are 4 defensemen making $9.5MM to $9.6MM -- Werenski, Fox, McAvoy and Seth Jones. All of those contracts took effect this season (so some were likely signed in 2021). After that we drop down to Darnell Nurse at $9.25MM, Roman Josi at $9.1MM and Dougie Hamilton and Makar at $9MM. No one else is at or above $9MM. So, there are a total of 10 defensemen making $9MM or more, and only 2 making $9.6MM or more. It's certainly possible that Dahlin ends up with 100 pts and the Sabres reward him for that one huge year, despite a prior career-high of 53 pts, but I think something in the nines is more likely.

All of this is fair -- but it's also fair that the contract numbers I mentioned are good 2C numbers, which is what Cozens seems to be. Having said that, I agree that Dahlin is likely a $9MM+ guy, if not $10MM.

Now you're talking. #17 OA -- and therefore pretty likely to slide to 2024 -- is materially different from #8 OA.

Again: no NHL GM -- let alone the GM of a rebuilding team -- would trade what could very easily be the #8 overall pick in a deep draft -- i.e. a player like Quinn -- plus a very good prospect who was #14 overall last year, for Demko (who, btw, has been a starter for all of 2 seasons and is currently recovering from a significant injury). Not making a foolish deal like that is not "shopping at Bargain Mart." It's just avoiding a foolish move. And citing TM's trade of #21 overall for Lehner doesn't help your argument -- it hurts it. Lehner was a washout with the Sabres and TM was a disaster.

It's an interesting question. If Cozens finishes this season with, say, 65 pts, and he's willing to sign a 7- or 8-year deal, it's hard to see him getting less than, say, $6.5MM per year. But as you point out, I don't think they can give him more than TT's $7.14MM per year.

Mitts had 12 ES points last year in 40 games. DG is going what he's supposed to do -- nurture Mitts' confidence, including by making excuses for him and not throwing him under the bus in the media. Mitts' story isn't fully written yet, but what has been written is lousy. Pretending otherwise is just pretending.

Here's what the Athletic said: So we're relying on "there are those in the industry" and "late first-round pick" and "currently in the 11th slot" (although #10, #9 and #8 are one point worse, #10 has 2 games in hand and #7 and #9 have 1 game in hand) as support for the Sabres trading what is highly likely to be a mid-lottery pick plus Rosen? Smells like #hammymath.

Fine -- he made a nice pass in the first period of a game that turned into a blowout win. The key point, of course, is that he's still a major net negative.

You answered your own question, because the answer is obvious -- no NHL GM would trade a pick that looks likely to be 8 overall, plus a good scoring forward prospect who was #14 overall last year, for Demko.

Yes, Mitts made a nice pass to Tuch in a blowout win, and yes, that line produced SOME improved analytics relative to Mitts' line for the past month when he was on with VO, which were shockingly terrible. However, vs Pitt, TT's line -- which includes the 2nd-leading goal-scorer and 3rd leading point-scorer in the NHL -- produced ONE high-danger scoring chance (and allowed 2 against). That's because Mitts makes 5 poor decisions with the puck when he gets it in the O-zone for every good one he makes. TT and Tuch's line will have good forechecking/possession analytics regardless of who the 3rd member is. But putting Mitts on with them is like throwing a fire blanket over them. DG is doing the opponents a massive favor. He's neutering one of the most dangerous lines in the NHL.

I don't think anyone would give the Sabres anything for Mitts. Maybe a 3rd-round pick, but certainly not a goalie or defenseman who is capable of playing this year. As for where to slot him in the lineup -- good question. I'd probably put him between Zemgus and KO, which would leave the other line with something like VO-Krebs-Jost. I recognize that Jost is a C, but he can probably play wing, and in any case that line looks better to me on paper than any line with VO and Mitts together, including VO-Mitts-Gretzky.

I wouldn't make this trade in a million years, and I don't think any NHL GM would either.

Well, Mitts has now been on TT's line for 2 games in place of Skinner, and in those 2 games, that line has zero ES goals (although they had 3 PP goals last night vs LA). OTOH, with Mitts gone, the Asplund-Jost-VO line looked much more effective last night and had 5 points, all at ES. Mitts continues to be a major problem and offense-suffocating factor. I am fine with giving Mitts the rest of this season to evaluate him, but I continue to question his usage and linemates.

Clearly Mule's presence/absence has a significant effect. However, even with him in the lineup, the Sabres haven't done well against good teams, losing to: Fla NJ TB Colorado Pittsburgh (twice) OTOH, Edmonton is the only team currently in the playoffs that the Sabres have defeated with Mule in the lineup. More than anything IMHO, if the Sabres are to make a push to get into the playoff picture, they need to start getting some wins against good teams.

One minor item from last night that I found interesting: Jost had the most PK time, followed by JJP, then Cozens and Quinn. I don't recall seeing JJP and Quinn on the PK much this year if at all.

BTW, that Kings team is tied for 2nd place in their division, and the Sabres pretty much blew them out of the building.

Now they need to win 2 out of their next 3 — Colorado, AZ and Vegas (and you-know-who is on IR currently and may not be back for the game). @Taro T’s a hater, but he’s got no imagination. My plan to get back to DeLuca .500 by New Year’s will work and the Sabres will be very much in the hunt.

Different eras though. The passing game is a much bigger part of the offense now.

Good call -- he's on the list too. Diggs hasn't been here long enough yet IMHO to supplant Reed, although Diggs' peak is probably higher than Reed's. It's pretty close though -- Reed was a fantastic player.

Oh, I agree that Drury didn't want to be here. He made that clear in his interviews when he was first traded here and by his action in leaving when OSP jerked him around. Nevertheless, he was a great player. I'm not sure I would definitively state that Hall was better than Max, full stop. (I realize that Hall was the MVP once, so my stance on this is probably ridiculous, but still. Max never dogged it anywhere the way Hall did here. And Max was electrifying. He could score it, he could pass it, and he was the fastest guy on the ice at all times. Hall, even at his best, is a strong skater and a decent playmaker but not elite at anything.)

I agree with much of this, and Drury was better than Max, but Max was about a million times better than Hall.

Yes -- Argo was outstanding (as was The Town). Ben A. has such a great touch as director -- it's hard to reconcile with his acting, or at least with his choice of roles.

Butler was so good. He and Takeo Spikes are my 2 all-time "what might've been if not for injury" Bills.

I wouldn't want to mess with JJP-Cozens-Quinn, which is an unstoppable force of nature right now.