mjd1001
-
Posts
3,638 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mjd1001
-
-
1 minute ago, SwampD said:
I'm confused. I don't see a single sabres post on this page.
I have lots to complain about. Not going to do it, though.
My point is the entire forum seems to be not much but complaints so we can just change the topic of this thread and put all the sabres talk in here.
-
2
-
-
My complaint today is that no one has changed the title of this thread from 'complaint thursday' to 'general buffalo Sabres posts', or 'comment about anything the Sabres do', as they are becoming one and the same.
-
This is a weird game for me. Approaching the end of the 2nd, and I have zero feel for it. Is Buffalo playing well or not? Lots of shots but it doesn't seem like many good chances. They are shutting down Toronto buy Nylander is doing whatever he wants. Just strange.
If Buffalo wins this 5-1, loses it 5-1, or it goes to a shootout, nothing would surprise me at this point.
-
3 hours ago, Weave said:
Matthews with the double hattie.
Remember the old NHL commercial with Ovechkin...a hat trick of hat tricks (9 goals), an Ovechtrick.
-
4 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:
Is experience and age the same thing ? Can't a 23 / 24 be further ahead in their NHL career if he has been in the league since he was 19
True, Buffalo's new 'top 4' has career 855 games played.
Florida: 2526
Vancouver: 2577
Boston: 2131
Winnipeg: 2413
Rangers: 1667
Vegas: 3014
-
1
-
1
-
-
I don't put much value in 'hits' as a stat (how accurate are they?) but I looked at Byram....3.3 hits per 60 minutes this year.
How does that compare to the current Sabres this year?
-Clifton, 9.3
-Erik Johnson, 8.1
-Samuelsson, 7.6
-Dahlin, 5.3
-Jokiharju, 4.0
-Bryson, 2.0
-Power, 1.6
-
I'm all for this trade, but something to consider, Experience on defense seems to have gotten VERY important the last few years in the NHL:
Top 5 teams in the league this year right now, age of their top 4 D-mean they rely on:
-Florida (29, 27, 28, 32).....ave: 29, youngest 27
-Vancouver (24, 26, 34, 35)...ave 29.75, youngest 24
-Boston (26, 30, 27, 30)....ave 28.25, youngest 26
-Winnipeg (28, 30, 28, 33)....ave 29.75, youngest 28
-NY Rangers (26, 24, 30, 28)...ave 27, youngest 24
And Vegas as the cup winner last year (34, 28, 33, 36)....ave 32.75, youngest 28
Now for Buffalo...with Byram, Dahlin, Power, and Samuelsson: (23, 21, 23, 22)....ave 22.25. OLDEST 23
Buffalo's OLDEST D-man is younger than the youngest on the top 5 teams this year, and of course the AVERAGE age of Buffalo's new top 5 is less than the single youngest guy on any of the teams above.
This D-group has the potential to be Elite, one of the best the NHL has seen in years...BUT if that does happen, its likely to need a few YEARS to get to that point.
-
1
-
-
I'm not as worried about the Lefty/Righty thing with how he fits into the team, but more about the style of play.
I think your top 2 d pairings, you want one super skilled, attack the other end guy....and you want one guy who is more of the guy who is responsible, will not get caught up out of position, can get loose pucks and make a good first pass out of the zone. Doesn't have to be super physical, just 'responsible' (thus I was thinking a Vet with a LOT of expereince).
Your bottom pair guy is just going to be the best 2 guys you can scape up that won't hurt you while getting 5-9 less minutes of ice time than your top guys.
With that said, looking forward, Dahlin is the 'attack first' guy....Bryam clearly seems to be the same style. That leave Samuelsson as the 'responsible guy', but then Power also? I'm not sure how they 'fit' when going into next year.
-
4 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Right, but you are getting into trouble here now (with me lol) because you yourself argued otherwise. I read all your posts. You are the “we don’t need surgery” guy we just needs tweaks. So how can I put faith in your well-laid out arguments if they, nonetheless, appear to be positions you’ve taken purely to take them, but not in line with your original stance?
I'd rather have them do surgery with the scalpel instead of the sledghammer myself. But, I'm open for anything at this point.
I would RATHER they resign Mitts, move Cozens to wing, and trade for a D-man in the offseason. However, I'm ok with this. What I consider different is a full coaching change, Adams out as GM, and numerous player changes (when I said surger with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer, it was in respons to those who want the major moves like I just listed in this sentence.)
-
2
-
-
Just now, Thorny said:
Thanks. If KA believes the deal helps us next season, he absolutely needs to pull the trigger
Most/many of us wanted change. As fans we wanted a 'swing for the fences' type move. You aren't getting Cale Makar for Krebs and a pick and a prospect. To get a young guy with potential, you have to give up something. For now, I am 'entertained'.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
Here are the Sabres top 9 for 2024/25 after this trade
Skinner TNT Tuch
JJP Cozens Quinn
Benson Krebs Greenway
Is that a play caliber forward group? I guess it could be if Krebs, JPP, Quinn, and Benson are all better next year and TNT Cozens rebound from their terrible 23/24 seasons.
Apparently great minds think alike.
Can those guys stay healthy for the most part? Can you get 170 goals out of those 2 lines? (100 from the first line, 70 from the 2nd line?) If so, AND Bryam progresses and is as good as he has showed flashed on the Blue line, it might be a playoff caliber 'roster' with that top 2 lines and your top 2 D-pairings. I hope and I'm willing to see how it goes.
-
3 minutes ago, Thorny said:
We can simply wait and judge based on the results, that part is easy enough
my question is a different one: does KA, in his heart of hearts, in your estimation, think he’s making the team better next season, through this move, and it’s corresponding?
I know you can’t know the answer but what do you think. Do you think KA is making the deal to facilitate an improved team next season? Or long term?
Personally I think he beleives it for both next year and the future. Next year, it is going to have to be him being confident he can do more than he has in any other offseason. Maybe its just me trying to be optimistic, but I think next year's success depends more on Tage getting back to his form of the previous 2 years and Cozens being who he has been the last 2 months and not the first 3 months. Ultimately, THAT may (or may not) be what he is counting on the most.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Question: As mentioned, I can definitely see the talent with Byram. From a team building standpoint I find it confusing. But, for someone/those more confident than me in this trade ending up beneficial: Do you see the trade potentially improving the team as soon as next season? Would you argue that is likely? Or is that more best case scenario, with your likely estimation being we see net improvement further down the line?
What say you? I’m open to the idea Byram could end up the better player but it literally only matters, for me, if it can happen for next season
I can't make a great case for things, but, as usual, it 'depends' on what else happens from now until next season.
-Is Tage playing through a wrist, and maybe foot injury and will return to his form on the past 2 seasons (40 goal, top line center). Has Cozens 'gotten religion' in terms of play in his own end (which he SEEMS to have, at least in the last month), making him your legit 2 way center?
-Maybe the Sabres, through is practice and play, see a "Mitts like" jump in Krebs play from this year to next, and you have him as your 3c. I need to see a lot more from him, I haven't liked Krebs since he got here as anything more than an 'average-at-best' player, but they might be seeing something I haven't yet.
-What other trades might be made, now or in the offseason.
-What other players might sign here in the offseason.
I can't give names, but suppose the Sabres find/trade for a Veteran, 2-way Center that gives you 15 goals and 25-30 assists on the 3rd line...while Tage and Cozens pick their games back up.
A lot of "ifs" in there, but that is the case for the potential of it helping out. What I remmeber of Byram is 2 years ago he looked great, and I mean GREAT in the Avs cup run. I didn't know much about him going into the playoffs but when I saw them play I was thinking "how did they end up with ANOTHER guy this good on the blueline" Of course, he has the injury risk. But I truly believe the potential is there for him to be a better player long term than Mitts, now its just up to the organization to fill in the gaps in the roster.
-
31 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Is Byram going to get more than Dahlin and Power? Casey would have been among the team leaders in I’ve time regardless of Tage and Cozens. You aren’t ever getting the limited minutes the “3rd line C” connotation implies: if you are a top forward you are among the leaders in minutes.
I'm guessing here, but long term, I think the goal would be for Byram and Power to get about 18-19 minutes even strenght per game. They seem to want to use Power on the PK, so Byram can take the role of 2nd unit PP Qb. They both end up with 20-22 minutes per game that way, HOPEFULLY bringing Dahlin down to the 23-24 range (he is over 25 now)
-
1
-
-
Just now, seer775 said:
Skinner - TT - Tuch
Quinn - Mitts - Cozens
This is how it was supposed to go.
Actually, I love having Cozens at wing with Mitts, but it seems like every time they try him on Wing, he goes back to center pretty quickly. Trust me, I have been one of the biggest people on this board pushing for Cozens on wing. I just looks like, long term, they want Cozens centering Quinn and Peterka.
-
5 minutes ago, Thorny said:
This take isn’t even grounded in statistical reality
Even if Casey was our third best C, if he’s our third best F, he’s not getting “3rd line minutes”. Thats not how the nhl works
You are so sure going forward he would be getting more ice time than both Tage AND Cozens? Again for my other post, I don't think Mitts is a game changer....so I'm willing to look at how this plays out.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, oddoublee said:
i typically enjoy your takes - and still do! but i dont see it here. this team needs more veteran top 6 players - not less. the pipeline and krebs is all well and good - but they are not, nor guaranteed to be better than mitts.
offensively, as of now, this team is worse off for the next 2 years (based on no additional significant moves being made, of course).
Byram is so young, but 2 years ago he played great in the playoffs for Colorado. So, without concussions, he could be one of those good-to-very-good D-men at an accelerated age. He has those worrying concussions, but when you watched his entire playoff run 2 years ago, he looked like he could be a star on the back end.
Plus he's a player. An actual Player who had at least one great playoff run individually, he's not another 'draft pick' that we can look forward to in a few years. He's a guy that has injury issues, but has had some great games as a young guy that we get to see play now.
And Mitts, is he better than Cozens or Tage? To me, when everyone is healthy, I think ultimately he is the 3rd center on this team, which means he isn't going to be a guy that gets 1st line Power play time for the rest of his career. I guess Mitts "may" deserver $6-$7m per year, but I don't want to give that to a 3rd guy who is likely to get closer to 3rd line minutes.
It also seems like there are a LOT of posters here criticizing the Sabres for thinking Cozens and Tage were better than they were, making the case they simply had 'career' years.....can't the same thinking be applied to Mitts this year? Difference is, Tage's 'career' year was almost 50 goals. Cozens was 30+ goals when he was 22. Mitts current season 'could' be a career year when he is on a 20 goal pace already at his age 25 season.
As for the D-group....Maybe Dahlin wears down with his heavy minutes. Power too. Samuelsson is injured all the time. Maybe, MAYBE bringing in another young, highly regarded guy...you can reduce the minutes of everyone (spreading them out among the whole group) and make them all better/less likely to be injured.
I'm trying to look at this in a positive way. The negative thinking (I got negative in a BIG way with Cozens earlier this season) and the negativity of this board finally got to me about 2 weeks ago and I'm choosing to look at the positive side of things.
-
5
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Mango said:
Fair point, but for more color does this trade make you want to watch the Sabres more on Thursday/Saturday? Next October? 365 days from today?
Because if it get you to watch the game this weekend, but not next season, this is really bad value.It depends on how good he is...but more as soon as he plays because he is the 'shiny new toy'. Possibly more next year because I think Mitts is good, but as I said in other posts, I don't think he is a game changer, but Byram COULD be part of a game-changing D-group.
-
1
-
-
I guess I'm almost alone in this, but I'm looking forward to seeing Byram play when he suits up. Makes me want to watch the games a bit more than if no moves were made.
-
5
-
1
-
2
-
-
Ok, the positive point of view as others have said....
-Krebs basically takes Mitts spot. Is he as good? No, but he has taken a considerably step forward.
-Byram, although ANOTHER very young D-man, might possible give this team the best "Young" top 4 D-group in the league. He is so young and still getting better.
-You don't have to pay Mitts that $5m-$7m per year, hopefully Krebs can give you a lot of what Mitts did, AND a lower cost guy from Roch fills in that spot next year on the lower lines.
I "Like" Mitts, but I didn't "love" his game. He has turned into a very good player but not one I want to pay a lot of money for as I don't see him as someone who can take over a game. I'm good with this move at this point, although I really, REALLY did like Mitts at center with Cozens on wing, I think this guarantees Cozens at Center, which I'm not too happy with.
You all can be negative all you want because that is what most of you do best, just complain about things almost no matter what moves happen. For me, Mitts is good but he's not a game changer carrying this team on his back to win after win after win....to see a change like this, I'm happy to see what it brings.
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
The Sabres seem to play well against the Leafs. Over the drought, at least somewhat recently, they have better showings against Toronto than they do agains other team that are that far ahead of them in the standings. Toronto is the better team, but when Buffalo plays them, I almost think of it as a 50-50 game whether than win or lose.
I think Toronto has matchup problems against young teams with a lot of raw talent. Those teams tend to make Toronto work, and the Leafs don't like that. Tononto likes it when they can 'out-talent' a team just by showing up. I'm not saying Buffalo has better all-around players, but in terms of pure 'stick talent' and 'skating talent', no matter how raw it is...the Sabres have that. Toronto seems to like playing teams like Winnipeg, or Dallas, that are very good, all around, hard working teams...but teams they have more talent than on paper. Toronto has Struggled against Chicago, Buffalo, Ottawa, Columbus...teams that aren't that good but are very young and 'don't know any better'.
However, Every once in a while though, the Sabres put up a clunker against Toronto. I have no reason to think tonight will be the night for one of those other than it feels like 'they are due' for one against Toronto.
-
34 minutes ago, oddoublee said:
Kyle and EJ.
VO - there will be no takers.
Joker will be to expensive
Girgs and ER stay, as I think KA will want to resign them both.
This team really needs a Top 6 forward. More scoring options needed to free up Tage - and Vet depth is needed for when players like Tuch and Quinn are out - or Skinner is on a cold spell. Our current depth is way way too young.
I could see Zemgus and Robinson being moved if there is a market for them (not sure what it would be for Robinson but I think Zemgus could get a mid-level prospect or a mid round pick), and I think they could still be resigned next year if they are moved. A player like that, a team isn't going to trade for a 4th liner and then make it a priority to extend them.
Okposo. Yes, I think he has lost a step skating this year, but I actually think he will be in demand. Someone who supposedly is respected around the NHL, a guy that teamates like enough to be captain, on pace for 16-17 goals WITH limited minutes. If you are a playoff team looking for an upgrade on your 4th line...maybe even if you have holes on your 3rd line, he would be someone that might be at the top of lists of shoppers.
Another thing to consider...contracts. The Sabres have a lot of prospects already, and I'm pretty sure the NHL has a limit on the total number of contracts a team can give out. You keep accumulating later round picks....a lot of those are basically going to be thrown away if in a couple years you have a draft class of 10 guys and you only have room to sign a couple. With that said, unless you get a bunch of late round picks, and you take a 6th and a 7th and flip them into a late 5th. You take that 5th and package it with your 2nd to move up 3-4 spots to get the guy you want in that round. OR...I'd almost rather have those picks for 2025 and NOT 2024. If you take 2024 late round picks...they are going to get used this year. Accumulate mid-to-late round picks in 2025, and you can use those to BUY at next years deadline. You aren't buying at this years deadline.
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:
Olofsson, E. Johnson, Okposo and Girgs are all moved
Comrie might get moved
Sabres likely look to acquire a bottom 6 player seeing as Top 4 D and Top 6 Forwards with any term aren't usually available at the deadline.
I really don't think Olofsson gets moved. Maybe for 'future considerations' that basically mean you move him for nothing. Even then, why not just waive him? The problem is, right now he is a guy that other teams might think there is a 20% chance can contribue as a scorer, but an 80% chance he won't be able to contribue in any meaningful way. Then the issue is, that nearly $5m contract (at least what is left of it this year).
No way anyone wants him at all unless the Sabres retain money. But, each team can only retain money on 3 guys...Why would the Sabres do that? Even if you retained almost all of his contract, what are you getting, a 7th rounder? I would rather not retain money at all, on the SLIGHT chance a last minute deal comes up for someone else (or multiple guys) that someone gives you something of VALUE but only if you retain money. I mean, the Sabres might even be in a position to be the '3rd party' on someone else's trade where they retain money and get a higher pick for doing that than they would for Whatever VO gets.
I actually think, in a PERFECT situation, VO can have a role on a team...it just seems that the Sabres are clearly no longer that team...and any team that wants him is best off taking a run at him in the offseason for nothing.
-
58 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:
I'm really surprised at the amount of posters against it. Lindy is a legitimate NHL coach and we need that. It's not about nostalgia for me, I don't care about that.
If Lindy shows he still has the desire, I'd go that way.
When the Bills sucked, we were in this constant cycle of not knowing if it was the players or the coach. I'd like to eliminate one of those.
Let's be honest, we like DG but we're not going to ever say, oh man we let a great coach leave our building.
If they make a coaching change, I'm all for Lindy being the pick. I'm just not ready for a coaching change yet. Other than 'its obvious', i haven't really heard many reasons why Granato should be gone. To me, this team was always in for the 'long build' despite fans not wanting it to be that way. The Defense (top 4 at least) is SO young and inexperienced, a couple forwards had career years last year, and they have had more key injuries this year than last year. That isn't on the coach to me.
8 hours ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:I would rather keep DG at this point. I don't think coaching is the biggest issue right now.
@Eleven has always said it is about the roster. I agree with him. It's always about the roster.
The Devils GM has not done enough and they have had some key injuries - the coach is the scapegoat and is fired.
KA has not done enough and the Sabres have had some injuries and the team decided to change focus on the defencive side of the game. It has taken a while, but things are starting to come together.
DG is not the problem. Some of his assistant coaches are not good enough.
Bring in Ruff if they want, but not as HC.
Agreed. Its an unpopular opinion, but I totally agree.
-
1
-
Buyout of Jeff Skinner Numbers
in The Aud Club
Posted
Until you are sure someone who replaces him is going to give you 25-30 goals, or you are sure Skinner's production is going to drop 40-50%, I don't get rid of him. I can agree that he isn't great in his own zone, but I still do not hardly EVER see him making mistakes that cause goals against, or him being out of postion frequently, or turning the puck over in the neutral zone leading to goals against.
I get it, he's not physical, he doesn't rush to the boards to win battles. But he DOES score you about 30 goals per year and I simply do not see him causing issues that lead to major goals against. I have looked. I have watched him on the ice. I have looked at replays of goals allowed. He is not a positive without the puck, but I don't see him as a negative and he is most times literally the only player (along with Zemgus) that will go to the front of the net on the offensive zone.