dudacek

I really like the Sabres blue line talent and I think people tend to put too much emphasis on handedness (especially when Dahlin is a proven stud at RHD). But the pieces sure don’t seem to fit together with the ease they do up front. And it gets even more difficult once you begin to factor in the analytics of various pairings and the uncertainty about how Lindy intends to tweak the system and deploy his blueline. I can see it going two ways, depending on whether or not Lindy wants his first pair to function as a shutdown/matchup pair in the way he used Zhitnik/Smehlik way back when. If that’s the case, then I see Samuelsson/Dahlin as that pair with the other 2 pairs being high-risk high-reward r/l groupings. I’d prefer: Byram/Dahlin Power/Jokiharju Samuelsson/Clifton To me, the first pair is all about skill and edge - a go-for-it, identity-creating, dare-the-opponent-to-keep-up unit that gets used in all situations. I see Samuelsson/Clifton getting more work against the banging teams and lines, Power/Jokiharju against the skating teams and lines. Mule and Power would get a lot more ice time than their partners because of special teams and a situational play, with Dahlin/Mule a tool Lindy would use to bring games home.

My starting lines: Benson Thompson Tuch Peterka Cozens Quinn Zucker McLeod Greenway Malenstyn Lafferty Aube-Kubel Nothing too controversial here at all. I think 90% of you will agree with 9 of the 12 slots, with the debate happening over where the top 3 LWs should go. My rationale starts with believing Tuch and Thompson will succeed regardless of their 3rd wheel, and wanting “line2” to be a matchup nightmare for opposing coaches. Quinn is the guy I want driving that line and Peterka is the guy who he has the most chemistry with. I also need Cozens to rebound and the best way to do that is to play him with 2 of the team’s 3 best wingers. This was a good line when JJ and Jack were rookies. With the added experience of all 3, it could be great. I think Lindy starts Zucker on the Thompson line and I can see the logic. He brings some of Skinner’s finishing ability and also his edge (except he brings it at both ends). And he can play with high-end skill; it’s easy to see him connecting with Tage the way he did with Malkin. He shouldn’t hurt them matchup-wise and it’s a way of maximizing his skill set. And I can understand his reluctance to use a 19-year-old the way he’s probably going to use Thompson and Tuch. But I just see so much potential in adding what Benson does well to the Thompson/Tuch combo: he will get them the puck and clean up their leftovers in front of the net while upping the line’s defensive acumen. It would be so Benson to take the opportunity and run with it. And while I think running Benson on line 3 would make for an effective trio in terms of tilting the ice, I prefer Zucker with McLeod and Greenway because he is the only one of the 4 who has shown any real finishing skills. I see three guys with different but complementary skill sets properly slotted where they can be effective: a real 3rd line. The Lafferty line and its role needs no explanation.

Last year’s most frequently used players versus this year’s projection: Tuch 1,463 minutes-> Thompson (1st PP, 1st line) Cozens 1,361 -> Tuch (top 6, both special teams) Peterka 1,344 -> Cozens (top 6, both special teams) Thompson 1,286 -> Quinn (top 6, both special teams) Skinner 1,184 -> Peterka (top 6, PP) Greenway 1,166 -> Benson (middle 6, special teams alternate) Mittelstadt 1,133 -> McLeod (middle 6, PK) Benson 1,031 -> Zucker (middle 6, PP alternate) Krebs 1,000 -> Greenway (middle 6, PK) Okposo 830 ->Malenstyn (bottom 6, PK) Girgensons 747 -> Lafferty (bottom 6) Olofsson 590 -> Aube-Kubel (bottom 6) Jost 456 -> Krebs (next man up) Robinson 440 -> Rousek (first call-up, bottom six) Quinn 422 -> Kulich (first call-up, top 6)

I think people tend to fall into thinking “he’s the 13th forward so he doesn’t fit” when the fact is that the “13th forward” plays a lot, the opening night roster rarely sticks, roles change, injuries happen, and players fall in and out of favour. This time last year we would probably be arguing as to whether or not the 13th forward was Jost or Olofsson. Regardless, that player was already in the starting line-up due to Quinn’s injury. That same injury created an opening for the “14th forward” which Benson seized, and he quickly pushed past those two to become a lineup regular. Meanwhile, disappointing results led Adams to add Robinson into that same mix at the bottom of the roster. Bottom line? The Sabres 12th, 13th and 14th most used forwards last year played 51, 43 and 40 games respectively. And the “14th forward” going in, Benson, actually finished 8th on the team in ice time. In terms of where he fits, Krebs might end up like Jost did, or he might end up like Benson. But your 13th forward is going to get used and how good he is matters.

Definitely. But this is about making it a public talking point. When you are a “91-point and rising team” that puts up 84, people talk about accountability. When you’re a 78-point team that puts up 62, people just talk about how bad you are.

Because last season was the first time in a decade they were in a position for it to matter?

So cautious means he’s not going to trade for core players or trade away the core he’s been developing. Unless he does, but that will mean he doesn’t actually think those players are core?

What does cautious mean to you? If you don’t see risk in trading a 9th overall pick 2 years after picking him, or your leading scorer for an unproven defenceman or a 2nd-rounder for a career minor leaguer, where do you see risk?

Still hanging on to this? Mitts for Byram, Savoie for McLeod, a 2nd for Malenstyn? Adams is into another phase.

We’ve had 6 young players commit to signing here long-term in less than 2 years. For some reason people don’t seem to count that, but for me it’s a sign that this has already started to happen.

Goaltending has been a talking point for Adams' entire tenure and really since Tim Murray shipped Ryan Miller to the Blues. According the Athletic, the Sabres have the NHL's 3rd best group of goaltenders, combining the cap, the present, and the future: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5646654/2024/07/26/ranking-each-nhl-teams-current-and-future-goaltending-outlook-part-3-the-top-10/ 3. Buffalo Sabres Current: 11 Granger: I absolutely love the current trajectory of Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen. He took major strides in his second full NHL season, stopping 22.46 GSAx (sixth in the league, just behind Swayman) despite playing behind a porous Buffalo defense. Luukkonen’s biggest asset is his mind, reading the ice to stay ahead of plays and make saves look easier than they should. He recently began working with respected Finnish goalie coach Hannu Nykvist (who famously worked with Bobrovsky). At 25, the future is bright for UPL and the Sabres, who also have high-upside prospect Devon Levi. Future: 2 Wheeler: Luukkonen’s no longer a prospect but Levi, Scott Ratzlaff, Ryerson Leenders and Topias Leinonen are, and each has varying degrees of potential. I still believe Levi’s one of the best young goalies in the sport and the heir apparent (over UPL) for the Sabres net long term, and I’ve got a lot of time for both Ratzlaff and Leenders, even if though don’t have the size teams covet. Leinonen does have the size but I worry about his feet/mobility/fitness. Still, in Levi, I think they have a potential 1A and between the other three, you hope that one becomes a backup/No. 3 down the line. Cap: 10 McIndoe: The Luukkonen extension dropped this week, and if Jesse is right about where he ranks, it’s decent value at $4.75 million, although at five years it’s certainly not without some risk. With Levi and veteran James Reimer both on cheap deals, the Sabres’ spending here is reasonable. Bottom line: Did we … did we just dump a bunch of optimism on the Buffalo Sabres? This is so confusing. Thoughts?

I think Lindy has a clear influence, just like I think Granato has a clear influence: Adams strikes me as collaborative. I also think Terry has a clear influence and has done more harm than good. But I see clear differences between Murray, Botterill and Adams. I see the change in the roster this year is primarily the result of 2 things: 1) the natural evolution from a development focus to a winning focus, which started last year and was always going to part of a draft and development plan 2) Adams realizing the mistakes he made with last year's roster and moving to fix them.

Are Thompson and Tuch the most-skilled duo of big players in the league?

Last year wasn't fun, but these guys were: Looking forward to seeing them in Prague to start the year.

Of course you do, you're a Sabres fan. History makes it difficult to trust the good things you see, not just with UPL, but with the franchise in general. This board probably didn't really give UPL's season last year the attention it deserved as it happened because of context, but it was the best season we'd seen by a goalie since prime Ryan Miller. He was really good, like legit top starter good. Just like Tage Thompson was freaking amazing the year before —best season by a Sabres forward since 16 and 89 were tearing it up — and we didn't go all-in on that either. We're (and I'm very much counting myself in this) conditioned to expect good things to disappear.

So guys like Power and Tuch and Thompson do count in this discussion? Im so confused.

Haven’t quite figured puckpedia’s interface yet, but as best as I can figure UPL will be the 17th-highest paid goalie in the league this year. Interesting contracts over the past few years given to players in comparable situations include: Demko 5x$5M Saros 4x$5M Petersen 3x$5M Husso 3x$4.75 Couple home run for teams on the 1st 2, Husso looks like a bad deal and Petersen was horrible bust

Isn’t the point of any long term deal to a young player to overpay early in the contract and reap the benefits later on? Are we seriously saying the Sabres aren’t getting their money’s worth on these long-term deals before half of them have even began?

You know that is 6th long-term deal signed by a Sabre in less than 2 years. Nobody ever talks about this when they say no one wants to be here. Besides Eichel, who was the last homegrown Sabre to sign for 5 years or more with the Sabres? (Prior to this Adams run) Vanek signed his big deal with Edmonton. Did Miller sign a big one?

Wow! A little surprised, but if he's legit, that's a wonderful contract. And he certainly looked legit last year.

puckpedia tweeted that UPL’s hearing is on July 29.

He'll be 28, so unless there is a weird clause I'm unaware of, he should be. It's 7 years NHL experience, or 27 years year old, which ever comes first.

I’ve shifted a bit on that one, from two directions. First of all they’ve got nobody who can make plays like Zegras can. He’s going to set up Thompson and/or Cozens in a way the other top 6 forwards can’t, particularly on the PP. 2ndly: Jost, Mitts, Skinner and Olofsson don’t play for this team anymore and the new forwards come hard; the identity up front has changed. I wouldn’t have wanted to add him to last year’s group, but I think there’s room for him in this year’s.

Ah, so it's because the arbitration had already been filed for. Makes sense. Love the breadth of knowledge on this board.

I find the internet chatter on Malenstyn gratifying. There's a lot of "who?" and "a 2nd-rounder for him?" and discussions around his charts. But whenever you come across a poster that has actually watched a lot of him play, the verdict is almost universally "fast, physical and honest, Sabres fans are going to love him."