WildCard
-
Posts
33,606 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by WildCard
-
-
12 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Tage a 1st and a 2nd.
And the bold is a myth. They had an excellent pool. Their best prospect was Robert Thomas, who was probably ranked similarly to Krebs and they refused to trade him. They had 4 other highly-ranked guys generally considered on the next tier. We picked Tage over Jordan Kyrou, Domink Bokk and Klim Kostin.
A low 1st and low 2nd aren't equal lottery picks. If Thomas wasn't available, find another team. They were hell bent on trading him and got a terrible return.
-
14 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:
2 SOG last night.
14 minutes of 5v5 ice time (1:30 of PP, plus some OT). Stats show there were 5 scoring chances against during his TOI, and 1 SC for -- 2 high danger chances against, 0 HDC for.
Interesting. Sounds like he's getting 'benched'
-
25 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Because arguably the best “2C” in hockey is the same as arguably the best defenceman?
Because a 95th ranked prospect is the same as a 26th?
Or because a 1st and 2nd rounder is the same as “a pick”?
The ROR trade was for 3 lottery tickets, not 3 raffle tickets for the fruit basket at the church bazaar.
At the time it was more like trading Peca, Wilson and a 1st for Mogilny. It’s unlikely Thompson and Johnson become Peca and McKee, but it was also unlikely Peca and McKee became Peca and McKee.
3 lottery tickets? Johnson (pick) and Tage, who else? Tage wasn't close to their best prospect and we gave them a bonafide center. The stole that deal and won a Cup with it
-
6 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
It's like trading Josh Bloom, Anders Bjork, John Hayden and a pick for Cale Makar.
Pretty much
-
The issue with the ROR trade always was we should have gotten a ton more at the time. Thompson wasn't even close to their best prospect and they didn't even want Sobotka or Berglund
-
2
-
-
31 minutes ago, dudacek said:
I also think the culture change started the second Donnie took over, and continued with Adams' purge. And the way Thompson, Dahlin, Jokiharju, Mitts and other key youngsters embraced it played a bigger role than has been aknowledged.
I'm not diminishing what Tuch brought, but I don't think the transition started when he arrived, more like he cemented it.
I wasn't opposed to Meatballs, but I did want someone else. I was opposed to Adams. While the jury is still out on both we can definitely see what you're describing here, which is huge.
And I will say this for Adams, it takes a good leader to surround themselves with good advisors and follow that advice. He seems to have done that in spades. I really look forward to our next couple drafts/off seasons and seeing where he goes from there.
-
3
-
-
29 minutes ago, Stads said:
Can anyone name the team leader in +/- this year? He is the only player who is actually a plus player
How many gp?
-
52 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
Nope. They had their run which was very respectable. The new darlings are the Kraken and they need help.
Or Montreal
-
1
-
1
-
-
That chart has Florida less likely to win the Cup than Toronto...
-
1 hour ago, LabattBlue said:
Holy Cow! I would love to hear Lehner’s answer after the game to the question…”What was going on with that goal?”
Lehner is and will forever be my least favorite Sabre
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, SDS said:
It depends on the timeline where you wanna take your data. February was absolutely miserable for us. Starting in March it hasn’t. It’s been pretty damn solid since March 1, we’ve beaten a lot of playoff teams and it appears our play is sustainable, which is that a player pace starting on that date.
19 minutes ago, SwampD said:Before seeing the graphic I posted, would you have guessed that their records were almost identical? I wouldn’t have. Certainly not by reading this thread.
I have no idea what this means.
I don’t think any of our wins matter. Don’t get me wrong, i’m enjoying them, but they don’t mean anything. Our losses certainly don’t matter, either.
I will say that I really like the hockey the Sabres are playing to finish up this season. I pray to god that it will be the same in October when games actually mean something again. I’m cautiously optimistic.
Cute.
What's SDS said. I think we lost 6 straight I'm February; I knew we were bad in that month. The talk around here has consistently been the Sabres since March
-
6 minutes ago, SwampD said:
And other than TO (who we own) and Carolina once, we lost to every other playoff bound team in the east.
Teams don’t give a crap about seeding.
Yes, they do. They also care about playing well.
You're dismissising the good teams we did beat and highlighting the good teams we didn't, that's not the full story.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:
and holy spit - seeing NJ's second and third goals ... lehner was brutal. on the second, he flubbed a catch, lost track of the puck, and then it was in behind him. on the third goal ... i'm not sure what happened. was lehner having an out of body experience? the devil player came out of the faceoff circle and was bearing down hard toward the goal line when he shot the puck. lehner did not react at all. he seemed bemused that the puck was in the net.
Quick, throw Kane and O'Reilly on there and let's see it all unfold again
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, SwampD said:
East teams already clinched. And we lost to them.
I’ll read whatever I want.😂
Yay!!!!! 2 to 3 years from now! How exciting!
Just as likely to not pan out. Doesn’t move the needle.
That would be something.
Just because they clinched doesn't mean they're not playing for seeding, or momentum. Toronto is trying, Carolina is trying. And outside of the East, Vegas is definitely trying too, same with Vancouver and Calgary.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, SwampD said:
For all the schadenfreude and ass shining in this thread, I think we need a little perspective.
We're the same team, only we aren't playing anyone who has anything to play for.
And no matter where Vegas' pick ends up, it ain't helping us make the playoffs next year.
Haven't we played a against a ton of playoff teams in that time span?
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, tom webster said:
You also don’t play around with people’s lives. You earn a promotion, you deserve to live that promotion.
Exactly. Their goal is to make the NHL. They've earned that, and the NHL team is much, much better off with them. It doesn't help what we have brewing on the Sabres by removing those players for the Amerks; they don't want to play in the AHL, their teammates on the Sabres don't want them going down, and losing these last 4 so the Amerks can get bounced in the playoffs isn't helping the Sabres. Furthermore, what happens to Power? Show him we aim to win at the NHL level and that's what this team is about.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Believer said:
Need to attack…
We just spent 5m straight on the attack lol
-
9 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:
The Sabres lose a 4-1 lead in the final minute. An enraged and engorged Owen Power reverses the spinning of the earth not only to wipe out the tragic turn of events but in this new game score all 8 Sabre goals in an 8-0 blanking of the moribund Blues.
Engorged...
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:
Numbers and projections can be a tricky thing.
Lets say Quinn adds 20. That isn't a 'pure 20', you have to think who he is replacing. Suppose he 'replaces' a player that scored 5 or 8....that is a net positive 12? Not really. The ice time he needs to get to that 20 is going to be more than the player he likely replaces. Suppose he gets 5 more minutes per game than the player he 'replaces'. Well those 5 minutes have to come off of someone else. Lets say you have to take 5 minutes away from a player/players who score at a 12-15 goal pace. Those 20 goals are great and needed, but you can't just add them to the bottom line without seeing what you are taking out of the lineup or who gets reduced ice time. Maybe some of Quinns 20 goal (maybe 25 goal) ice time is PP time, and that takes away from ice time on the PP for Okposo or Olofsson?
Right, and I'm not. Those are good points for sure, I'm just ball parking everything because yeah like you say, there's a lot of variables to consider and it's impossible to have a complete answer so for the sake of discussion just ball parking
-
Just now, GASabresIUFAN said:
The Sabres are a net -58 this season. We score about 2.75 gf and 3.5 ga. To be a playoff team, we need to improve both numbers by .5.
Like y’all I pretty bullish on the offense. I can easily see us getting the 40 goals we need to get to 3.25. If Mitts and VO stay healthy we should get half as of that number.
The issue for me remains the goaltending and defense. How do we eliminate 40 goals against?
Better offense means less time in our defensive end. Power will be up, a full year of good Dahlin and Samuelson. Need goaltending to improve but a tandem of UPL and a solid vet and I'm happy.
My biggest unknown is Cozens/Mitts. Can they be reliably good 2/3 line centers.
-
11 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:
When Quinn adds 30 that'll help (in place of Bjork's 4).
I would be very happy if Quinn added 20 tbh. But Cozens should improve, so should Mitts and Oloffson. We'll have a full season of Tuch as well, and a full season of a good Dahlin. Though Thompson probably regresses our next gain is pretty hefty.
-
1
-
-
Just now, That Aud Smell said:
A little sobering: A 97 point pace may not be an Eastern playoff team this season?!
The East is stacked yup, but keep in mind those events are related; as the bottom of the East gets better the point total required to be in the playoffs is less. 6/10 of the bottom teams in the league are in the East, and 3/5 of the bottom five.
-
1
-
-
Ended up going 2-4, really should have been 3-3 but we blew some games. Not bad.
-
1
-
-
Title says it all. Figured it was buried in the GDT if anywhere so here's a spot for it.
-
1
-
GDT: Buffalo at NJ, 7 pm ET 4/21/22, MSG & WGR
in The Aud Club
Posted
Might be the weirdest game I've ever watched.