mjd1001
-
Posts
6,151 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mjd1001
-
-
Would Tampa be interested in UPL (They have 2 goalies that basically have never played in the NHL AND Jonas Johanson), and if so would KA be willing to trade him in the division?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:
I just priced 300 lvl's, x 2, on both ticket Master and vivvid. 232 and 249 respectively. YIKES!!!!
I also looked at section 106? 6th row, 400 something each, as well as 200 lvl, which were just over 800 each.
That is insane.
Edit, this was for the season opener Ranger game.
I follow the team on this board all the time and I watch most of the game, but to a certain extent I am closer to a casual fan than a Die-hard (don't own much merch, if the team is bad I'll watch half the games and find something else to do instead, etc).
I'm pretty happy watching the games at home. To get me to go to a game, it has to be a Fri, Sat, or Sunday game. I don't need the best seats but I don't want to be in the 300's or behind the net. So I'm kinda-picky-but-not-too-picky.
I just looked at a couple of options for 2 tickets, don't care about the opponent. For me to go to one game, 2 tix with feels are approaching $300. Not including of course parking and any food or drink I could get there. I love that people enjoy going to the games and I want the place to be full....but after seeing that I'll stop complaining about MSG plus for $30 or month or upping my cable package from the basic tier to get the one with MSG on it for about $30-$40 more per month.
If I paid $400 to see a Sabres game for 2 of us (tix plus parking and something to eat, either at the arena or just before the game), and I saw a game they lost and only scored a goal or two..I'd be beside myself for a while.
-
Not a particular song, but the entire musical score for "The Dark Knight" and also "Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" totally fit the movies they were in.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
I watched about 2/3 of the pre-season games as well as DG’s post game interviews and have come away with the following thoughts
1. Benson’s skill level is off the charts. Benson’s body isn’t NHL ready, but come next year he’ll be a Sabre. A 9 game tryout could be in the works.
2. Goaltending - Levi is ready. Comrie was impressive against the NHL Pens, while UPL wasn’t in his start so far.
3. DG really likes Biro and Ryan Johnson. Could Biro steal last forward slot on the Sabres? Johnson is starting in Roch, but he could easily pass Bryson and Clague on the depth chart.
4. Mitts is going to be the 3C when the season starts. DG has played him exclusively at C so far. This relegates Krebs to the 4 and Jost to the press box. This implies at Rousek and Biro are fighting for a top 9 job. Maybe both lose and Benson or Kulich win the slot.
5. Tuch, Clifton and EJ haven’t played yet. Not sure why.
6. I’ve also liked what I’ve seen from Rosen, Kozak, Cederqvist and Novikov.
Did I miss anything?
Nothing this camp/preseason has changed my mind on goaltending.
Don't go get a high priced guy or even another mid-priced vet that may require more than 1 year (if you get a low-to-mid priced guy willing to take a 1 year deal he likely won't be much better than what you have). That money can be used/saved for elsewhere. You have 3 goalies on this roster that can make the team. Let them fight it out in camp, preseason, and practice and you take the 2 that emerge as the best 2.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, dudacek said:
It was like reconnecting with the ex night: all the players we worry about reinforced why we worry;
- Krebs hustled a lot and accomplished a little, like Krebs does.
Which has always been my worry about Krebs and why I'm not as high on him as so many. As we got to the end of last year, he had started to play a lot better. But more often than now when I watch him, he has the heart, attitude, and knowledge of a first round prospect, but the physical tools don't often match. He was a first rounder for a reason though, I hope he makes this team and is a good player for a long time, but I can't shake the feeling that very often he is just a step to slow getting to where he needs to be or just a bit less physical than he needs to be to win a crucial battle.
-
32 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:
It's on msg, so maybe they are not streaming?
There was an aritcle put out either by the Sabres or the NHL saying that all preseason games would be available on Sabres.com. Yet, no where to be found.
-
I lived in Boston years ago (early 2000's) at the time someone named Dale Arnold was doing the Bruins play by play. He wasn't spectacular, but he did a good job was easy to understand, and wasn't that much of a 'home', pretty respectful to other teams. I actually enjoyed him. Edwards must have taken over for him and is about 15x worse. He is very hard to listen to.
-
2 hours ago, Doohickie said:
Institute a chaser in the shootout. Once the shooter touches the puck at center ice, a player from the defending team can cross the blue line behind the shooter and do whatever he can to legally defend against the shooter. If the chaser commits an infraction a shootout goal is awarded. Just like shooters cannot repeat, neither can chasers.
I like this. I don't need it but I like it. Nothing to me looks more un-natural and not like hockey than when a guy comes in on the shootout and just slows it down REALLY slow.
Of course, what happens when its possibly a deciding shootout goal and you have a possible penalty (hooking, tripping) when the chaser takes down the shooter. What do you do when you get a penalty on a shootout, and what if it is a close/judgement call?
-
On 8/1/2023 at 6:33 AM, Kristian said:
Lose the instigator penalty.
Way too many douchebags getting away with cheapshots, because people are punished for stepping in.
Also, it’s never called right anyway.
I'd just rather have them call the cheapshots AND if they missed issue heavy fines for them after the game. That would put an end to it.
You don't see that much of it in the NFL, why? The NFL doesn't put up with it and there are fines when it happens.
-
1 hour ago, Quint said:
But they are last in the NHL in hits. Poor in faceoffs too. The iffy situation in goal is also concerning. These problems should be addressed.
This was brought up in another thread a month or two ago (maybe more?), but I think it at least is a discussion point....
Patrice Bergeron. There was an article right about the time he retired that talked about the way he was so good on defense from the forward position. One of the key points it brough up (and showed examples) was he would often turn away from a hit at the last minute, NOT finishing the check. Many times when the opposing player is stationary or along the boards and moving, they are not going to be in a position to join the rush forward, so by 'finishing your check' you don't do much to slow them down/take them out of the play, but what you do is you take yourself out of the play by insuring you are that 1-2 seconds later getting back. There was a radio show out of Canada that I personally listed to that talked about this.
Now I'm not saying the team shouldn't hit. But when you see a guy have someone lined up along the boards and he turns away at the last minute, often times it might actually be a good thing if he gets back into the defensive zone more quickly.
-
3
-
-
23 hours ago, ddaryl said:
TB is over the cap aren't they? Stamkos is 33 years old. A major teardown and rebuild is happening sooner than later. I think TB just wants to keep this team together for 1 more run at it. Extensions for Stamkos would have to come at a team discount
He will be 34 when his next contract starts, what exactly does he want for his next deal is the question.
If I'm Tampa, If he wants an increase in pay and/or more than 2-3 years on a deal, I'm walking away. Even a 3 year deal has him ending that deal when he will be 38 years old. I don't want to be going beyond that at all, and not paying even what he is getting paid now. If they are 100% SURE they will be a legit top 5 team in the league with him on a new deal and contending for the cup, then MAYBE...but I'd much rather re-tool than pay for a still-very-good-but-aging-into-his-late-30's guy.
-
2
-
-
Its not that big of a deal for me, but I agree overall.
Maybe there is something else going on in the building later in the day or the day before? Or the Sabres preferred an earlier game so they could get back to Buffalo in the evening and have a morning training camp practice the next day?
-
I want them to be better each year than the last. All I really want/expect is for this season to be better than the last. The Cup? When they are 'close' to that, then I will have expectations for it. Right now I don't think they are close to the Cup, so I just want this year to be better than last.
-
37 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
I wonder how many times Hamilton will be on WGR today telling ppl falsely that Trevor Zegras is better than Dylan Cozens, what say you? 5, 6 more? He is at at least 3.
Zegras is 'flashier', he may be more exciting to watch/provide more highlight reel clips. But that doesn't make him a better player. Unless it was a very good bargain, I'm not interested in him...I don't think he would bring in as much as what you might have to move out to get him.
-
21 minutes ago, Night Train said:
That's how Biden selected his VP. Ironic.
As if people from the right side of the aisle have never done things for the goal of getting votes instead of doing what is right? Laughable comment.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, thewookie1 said:
Well he shouldn't be capable of getting top money and short term.
My minimum is 6 years, I won't listen to anything less.
I don't disagree with you in the fact that I WANT him locked up long term. That is the best case scenario in my mind.
However, you said he shouldn't be capable of getting top money long term, but if he thinks he should then that is why there is no extension yet.
If you don't want to listen to anything less than 6 years (from the Sabres point of view) that may be another reason why there is no extension yet.
You can't put the pen in his hand and force him to sign what you want him too. I'm not disagreeing with anything points you make, other than if Dahlin and his agent don't think the same way, THAT is why we are closing in on camp stat with no extension for him (yet). One side is going to have to give in a little bit, lets see which side that is.
-
26 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:
Why can’t he just sign 8x10.5 it’s very fair and makes the fans happy while not handcuffing the team to a myriad of present and future issues.
He might be betting on the cap being in the upper $90m-$100m range in 2029 when his 5 year deal would be done. If he thinks he is a top 5 D-man in the league then, and in his prime, he will then be looking at a contract closer to $13 or $14m per year then. I'm guessing his thinking is why not get 5 years at $10 or $10.5 now..and then cash in 5 years later when as a D-man he will be in his prime AND the cap is likely to be much higher. From his point of view, long term he probably has more potential earnings going 5 instead of 8.
Another thing to think about....Thompson and Cozens are likely to be this teams stars up front going forward. Their deals are done in 2030. If Dahlin signs an 8 year extension, his deal won't be done until 2032. He might want the 5 year deal so he is up again BEFORE Cozens and Thompson are up. He and his agent may not want them to 'take all the money', he may want to be first in line for it.
-
Would I want a player like Dahlin tied up for 8 instead of 5? Sure do, especially for a D-man where their career peak years go a bit longer. Remember that he is under contract for another year and this extension would start a year from now...so if he signs for 5 years, you have him here for 6 more from the current time. That is a LOT of hockey.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:
I tend to agree that the Bills will ultimately need to bring in a guru of some kind to get Allen under control and help him be the player he can be. Daboll and his team did a very good job with that. Dorsey was a part of that team, but, as the OC, he does not seem to have sufficient control over Allen.
Agreed.
I was texting with a group of friends -- only 1 of them a Bills fan -- and asked to whom Allen best compares as an NFL QB.
I said Favre, maybe.
Then someone else chimed in: Dude. Jim Kelly.
And I was like oof.
I've always thought Favre was the best comparison for Allen. High energy, throw caution to the wind, reckless at times, very high risk, high reward. One thing you have to remember about QBs like they are....they don't have just 'bad games' or 'bad months'. They have great years and bad YEARS.
Look at Favre's career:
-Favre won the MVP in 95, throwing almost 40 td's (38 actually) and 13 ints. 0.2 points away from a 100 QB rating. He won the MVP next year in 96 with 39 passing tds.
-3 and 4 years later he was bad, (1998 and 99) he had back to back seasons with over 20 ints in each, with one season with a QB rating in the 70's.
-2 seasons later in 2001, he is back to being great, almost 4000 yards, 32 tds, only 15 ints, and a 94+ qb rating.
-Then in 2003-2005 he was really bad, he threw 67 ints over 3 seasons. In 2005 and 2006, he threw a total of 38 tds and 47 ints over those 2 seasons. In 2005, his qb rating was 70.9.
-Then he came back to being great in 2007-2009 to throw for over 4000 yards in 2 of those 3 seasons. In 2009, a 107.2 qb rating, with 33 td and only 7 ints.
When you have a QB that takes chances, and after a few years it appears he isn't going to change...odds are he won't change. Again, forget about a good game followed by a bad game, or a good month followed by a bad one. You may get a good year or two (MVP caliber) followed by a year or two where he looks like he is on the way out of the league, only to get back to close to MVP form a year or two later again.
There may be no way to 'fix' Allen, now way to 'reign him in'. No guru to change his style. He just may be what he is...and his career might be higher highs and lower lows... more than many of us want.
-
1
-
-
On 9/12/2023 at 10:01 AM, Goldseatsaud said:
The offense has no rhythm. McDermott has to reign in 17. Allen has been in the league for six years and is making the same bad throws
Its worse than that. For most of the 2021 season (ESPECIALLY the 2nd half) and the first half of last season, he cut down on those bad throws quite a bit. Its not that he is just making the 'same bad throws' as always, he actually has regressed from the progress he has made.
One thing I have noticed (at least my opinion) that has changed is the lack of medium-length throws. The throws that travel 12-225 years beyond the line of scrimmage. I don't have any stats to support this, but compared to last season and the season before, it seems like those throws are lacking. Now there are a lot more under 10 years passes or simply chuck it downfield as far as you can. The medium length passing game seems to be a lot smaller part of this offense. (either its not there at all, or it is just a lot less successful than it was).
-
10 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:
I'd just make all 1st rounders have a year shorter waiting time.
How about all drafted players have one year shorter? Probably only matters with first rounders, but even if you made all drafted players have a year shorter waiting time, it is a small fraction of all players in the chl.
-
One similarity to the 05-06 campaing:
The previous season the Sabres (of course) did not make the playoffs, but had a young team. 3 of the top 5 teams in the league the season played previously were Boston, Tampa, and Toronto. Buffalo would pass them, as they either had major changes to their rosters and/or an aging team.
-
Allen played very poorly. It is just one game. My belief all along was he was hurt the 2nd half of last year and it impacted his play, and once he starts playing 'not hurt' this year he would go right back to being a top-5 MVP candidate. But, he made numerous bad decisions. It wasn't just the INTs but he often threw the ball into coverage that a ball should NEVER be thrown into (2 or 3 defenders shadowing his target), while other players were open. He passed up on running or taking the 'almost sure' first down for something bigger that never came to be.
He had a very bad game, much worse than I thought. Lets hope this was a one week thing.
As for the rest of the team, nothing is really different to me. The OL was "OK" but not great/good. The defensive backfield looks old and slow. The pash rush was improved. Again, not much to take from just one game. Allen needs to get a lot better.
-
3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
Now to bolded. This is uncalled for and absurd. I wrote an entire post about why I thought the points you were using wouldn't work, the age thing was but 1 of them.
I gave your point of view equal weight and I disagree with it. I am not going to apologize to you if you literally cannot handle a different viewpoint such as Power is not worth 10% more than Sanderson at this moment in time (9/11/2023).
Which one of us is right? No idea, I think I am but time will tell and I could very well be wrong. If Power is not signed before the season begins, all of this is moot anyways.
Whatever. Learn to not always need to get the last word in to prove your point. Sometimes I let things go, but not when you are being such ar Hard *** about this.
3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:This is always the case when I point out flaws in someone's arguments. Personal attacks and the typical "settle down" nonsense. IMPO Your post was incorrect, I pointed that out and why I thought other subjective parts of your post would not be used. If you don't like it block me and be done with it. Yes Owen Power was 19 for about 15 NHL games before he turned 20. Idk how an agent uses that to get anywhere? It certainly doesn't equate to 10% more per year on the contract. I'll be sure to write "in my opinion" more often so you and others know I am giving my opinion.
The FACT you have narrowed in on the age and ignored all the other reasons I think what you are saying is wrong is interesting. Basically this above post reads like projection. I would recommend you loosen up, settle down a little bit, stop nitpicking and looking at the bigger post overall.
Let's do this then.
Power is younger. Sure but by not even 1 year (4 months), idk how an agent can leverage that much, other than claiming I guess that Power will be better long term than Sanderson cuz he showed it earlier? I think that is a tough sell from an agent for 2 guys that are 4 months apart in age (that's right your argument about playing in the NHL younger is based on 4 months of age difference).
+/- could be used but you have a tough sell of it when Adams and company can point to the Sabres just outscoring Ottawa by buckets. Ottawa also had a negative goal differential so again I think in the scheme of selling that Power deserves 10% more this is a tough sell to the Sabres. Rasmus Dahlin was a -36 under Krueger for example but it wasn't because of Dahlin as much as the team he was on and the coaching he had.
Okay so then we have point totals, Sanderson had 32 and Power 35. Power played 2 more games so that argument blows up there. Well if Sanderson had played 2 more games he would have gotten the same amount would be any counter you want to use in all likelihood. TOI, if I were using that I would say that Sanderson is better than Power because he produced more in less TOI. TOI can basically inverted to show that Sanderson did more with less TOI just as much as it can show that Power got more and played more. I think you get a wash out there.
So, how does Owen Power's agent go to Adams and say Power is worth 9mil for his 35pts when Dahlin is getting somewhere between 10-10.5 for his 73pts? That is the next biggest hurdle and where this allll falls apart IMO. Dahlin, the biggest thing Buffalo has that Ottawa does not.
My point or opinion if you will is that your arguments for why Sanderson is worth 10% less than Owen Power is weak and as the GM of the Sabres, I would push back on all those points.
On top of that Adams has leverage that Ottawa did not. Sanderson's agent could say "fine if you don't value my client we take bridges until we reach UFA or you trade us" and Ottawa has to give a bit, they don't have another Sanderson. What happens if Power's agent were to play that same card (same agent I think)? Hey Adams, if you don't give us 9mil for Power we walk! Adams, well I have Rasmus Dahlin so call me when you walk to wherever you are going and we will talk again. There is just less leverage and on top of that Sanderson is from Montana and Power is from Southern Ontario. Just saying that Power might be inclined to "settle" for 8mil when he gets to guarantee he plays about an hour from his family for the next decade.
Personally if I were Owen Power, I would take a 2yr bridge and then get paid big when it ends and the cap is up and I am a 50pt all around defender.
You really need to get a new hobby if the reply I gave you caused this lengthy of a reply. I can't and wont even read all of that. I made my point, don't try so hard to always be right.
Movies / TV Shows - I Have Watched / Plan To Watch
in The Aud Club
Posted
Saw both Barbie and Oppenheimer at the theater...not on the same day like others not even on the same weekend. Both were a little less than I hoped from the Hype.
Barbie was just below average to me. Not awful, I wasn't the intended audience, but even if I put myself in the shoes of the intended audience, nothing special here. Below average plot, no acting that stood out as good. The thing that got me was in a lot of the reviews, they spoke about how it shows women can feel 'empowered', to me it was a hollow message because they ended up treating the guys in the movie just as bad as women feel they are treated sometime.
Oppenheimer. It was good, but I didn't get great. It seemed like an above average, above budget documentary I would have seen at home. Good, again, but I didn't walk out of the theater thinking I saw one of the best movies ever.