mjd1001

The question should be, in 2-3 years from now, who do you think will be the Sabres top 4 D-men? If you have 6 that you think are really, realliy good, you aren't going to be able to keep them. you are not going to be able to pay top-2 or top-4 money to the #5 and #6 guys on your roster. So I think what you need to do is identify your top-4 in 2-3 years, and then anyone who is not on that list is expendable. You may say what about Injuries? or if the projection now doesn't turn out? You also have to consider they Sabres will still be bringing in even MORE prospects, and some will be D-men. I do not see at all how Erhoff is in your top-4 in a couple years from now, so my view is he should be HEAVILY shopped this offseason and get what you can for him.

Players like Kessler, O'rielly, and others are not what the Sabres should be looking for. We might want them because we heard of them, but what the Sabres really need to do is identify the players who are going to be the next ones in those positions. Think back 7-8 years ago, the Sabres identified Briere and Drury when people who knew they were but were not 'stars' in the way that Kessler and O'Riely are now. If there are any trades to be made, I want them to be for players who I am not thinking of now, but after I think about it more and more after it does happen, I like it better than when I first heard of it.

Ok, there are always exceptions to the rule, but I think the new 'rule' the Sabres are apparently employing is going to be the key to their succes, much the way Detroit has done things over the years: Prospects stay in the Juniors/Minors for a few YEARS before they are up with the big club. It doesn't matter if someone is good enough to be your 4th D-man at 19, keep him developing in the minors. If you bring him up now..maybe he'll be your 4th D-man now..but he will always be your 4th D-man. Keep him in the minors and have in play in all situations (which he may not do as the #4 guy on the big club) and have him spend more time LEARNING to make his game better in practice rather than game-planning the other team...and then when you do call him up he might be good enough to be the #2 guy, not a life-long #4 guy. There are a lot of fans in Buffalo who see a guy in the minors doing well and want to bring them up right away because they "are better than the older guys", but what they don't get is they might be a LOT better than the older guys if you give them a little more time. Whoever the Sabres draft #2 overall this year....MAYBE the best thing for them is to not be a permanent member of the Sabres until the 2016-2017 season. 2 more years in Junior (with 2 Sabres training camps and development camps) or 1 year in Junior and 1 year in the AHL may make for the best long-term player.

To include it? or that is it? If that is what they are leaking because that is the minor news that is great. If the whole announcement is the Womens under 18 World championships...well....I don't know just how major that is (maybe it IS a big deal, just I don't know much about it.)

Ok, I'm not sure where to put this but I just had to vent. Just watched the end of the Indy 500. Now I do have a Hi-def scree, but it isn't the biggest in the world, and what does ABC do? The last couple of laps when drivers are passing each other and battling for the lead, they go to a split screen (making the race actually only about 30% of the entire screen) so on the other side of the screen we can see the wive/girlfriends of the drivers reacting to each pass or holding their hands together? SERIOUSLY?? Then, just seconds after the race ends, back to a split screen with the very first interview the wife of the winning driver. Just annoying.

Ok, I'm one of those people find soccer very boring, but, being the world cup, I'll watch it again. I don't have my hopes up, but maybe I'll find it enjoyable? The problem is, I'm not a fan that is going to get really into it. I will be a casual viewer....I think soccer as a sport lends itself better to the more hard-core fan.

Personally, I'd go to more games (I go to 1 every 2-3 years now), even if the tickets were double the current price, if the experience was more like a Sabres game. I want to be comfortable. I want a clean environment. I don't want to see ANY drunks around me. Thats just me. If they keep the experience the same, i'm also fine with it...I'll just keep trying to enjoy the games at home.

I must have gotten lost in the conversation, I scanned a few pages of this thread pretty quickly...I did think the post was about Grigorenko, sorry.

By points I don't think you mean 'goals and assists' As of now, through a total of of 15 AHL games (9 regular season this year, 2 playoffs this year, and 4 playoff games last year) he has a total of 0 goals, 4 assists, and is a -1. Of course, it is early in his career and I'm not sure what they are asking him to do down there.

Ok, this is slightly off topic, but you have to wonder about Crosby with some post concussion symptoms? I would say no after the numbers he put up this year in a full season (basically close to the top of his career numbers in a full year) but I have to wonder based on a couple things I heard. Toward the end of the year, and now into the playoffs, he is obviously not producing numbers (at least goals.) Now, even a 10-15 game sample is pretty small (a lot of great players go through goal droughts like that), but I it something I heard/read a few times. I wish I could find it, but during the season I read an article online where someone (a former player or scout) was slightly critical of Crosby, saying that although he was putting up numbers, his "decision making" seemed to be a bit slower. What I do remember for sure is on the 11am-noon hockey show on 590 from Toronto, the other day someone said the same thing....that his decision making was a bit slower than it had been in the past...and they brought up that after a second major concussion....sometimes players never get back to the same level of decision making they had before them. I'm not sure if that is true or not..but having read it once and then heard a different source say it later, it does make you wonder. Of course, If Pitt goes on the beat the Rangers in the Series and Crosby puts up 5+ goals and at least 10 points...none of this will be said again.

I'm more upset with the guy for what he DID in the past and less for what he said here. He should have been looked into by the NBA or fined or punished when he settled or was brought up in numerous instances of things like trying to force Black people and Mexicans out of apartment complexes he owns. To me, that is a LOT worse than saying what he said. Also, I have almost as much problem with the women in this case, to looks to have set this up intentionally get a payday out of it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I wish the Amerks games were on TV. Would it be appointment television for me in the middle of November? Maybe not, but with how many nights I am just flipping around the channels, I'd probably end up watching 80% of Amerks games. And I know Ted Black has said there is no need (or even level of profitibility) but seriously, why not have a Sabres TV station? Pegula not only owns the Sabres, but also the Amerks and Bandits. There is a good ammount of programming there that would draw attention (not to mention you can re-play the games late at night or the following morning for those who missed them. With WGR being the station of the Sabres, you can have one (or both) of their shows on TV like many other sports networks do. As for the Summertime, how about getting creative and striking a deal with the Bisons (or, depending on how much you have to negotiatie, the Blue Jays? It still astounds me we have a team less than 2 hours away that the bisons are now the FARM club of and we can't get their games on TV) You also have the beyond blue and gold series and who knows if there will be anything they can justify televising from the Harbor center once that gets up and running. It won't be a multi-million dollar revenue generator, but you have enough programming to fill a station, and it would be good PR to draw more attention to the team (and once again, in my selfish scenario I'd get to watch the Amerks game here and get some regular news on them)

I agree that I wouldn't want him back, just I'm surprised in the first few responses there aren't a lot that say they want him back. I seem to remember before he was traded, it was about 50-50 whether people wanted him gone, and the ones that wanted him to say were throwing around "give him 6 or 7 years at $7 per year" kinda stuff.

As far as best pure goal scorer, I think #1 is a guy you didn't mention: Stamkos. Right now I put him and Ovechkin 1 and 1a, but Ovechkin is the 1a. As far as Gretzky goes...I don't want to get all "analytical", but I think he was great, but I sometimes question how great. Look at "adjusted stats" where it isn't just how many goals you scored in a season, but how many you scored compared to everyone else (the thinking is, if the rules were different or goalies had different equipment, etc, how did you compare to the rest of the league) The point is...Gretzkys best 5 years were great, but not quite as much as we think when 50 goal scorers weren't uncommon and that era also had some 70 and even 80 goal years by other players. I mean the year Gretzky scored 92, Denis Maruk had 60. 10 players had over 50. Don't get me wrong, 92 and 87 goals are great, maybe, probably the best goal scorer ever. But 90 and 80 and 70 goal seasons when others are getting 50 and 60 wouldn't be much better than someone getting over 60 today (like Ovechkin and Stamkos have done in the last few years) The following link isn't the final say in anything, but it is an interesting point of view for discussion: http://www.hockey-reference.com/leaders/goals_adjusted_season.html

He might not want to, but now that both he and the Sabres are eliminated, what would you offer him? Blank Check, he can write his own deal? 6 years, $40 million 3 years, $14 million Nothing, don't want him back? Any other ideas? Personally, I kinda like Miller, but I don't want him back at all. I'm at the point where I want to see what the current crop of young guys do/can turn into.

St. Louis's 2014 3rd rounder...unless Miller resigns with the Blues before free agency starts, which seems very unlikely. However, it might not be that big of a deal. What is St. Louis's first this year be? I'm not sure how the draft order is for playoff teams, but at Best that First this year would have been in the early 20's in a draft that isn't that deep. Plus, If I'm not mistaken, Buffalo would not just get it, but would have to give up a mid 2nd rounder and an early third rounder. Missing out on the 20th pick in a non-deep draft but keeping a 40th (or so) Pick and a 60th or so pick isn't that big of a deal. If someone can correct me on the exact details of this, please do.

Speaking of the 'best in the world', I'm not sure how far I want to push this, but in a few games I watched this Year, Crosby looked good, but not great, and I have watched most of the playoff series against Columbus and not only isn't he scoring, but he is a turnover machine and Defensive liability out there. So my question is this: Is it just a slump he is in? Is his first full season in a long time (plus the Olympics) and heavy ice time causing fatigue to set it? Or are we at a time where someone like Stamkos has 'caught up' to him as the most dangerous overall player? And in 2-3 years we might be talking about Mckinnon (or some other 20-25 year old) as the best player and not the 30+ year old Crosby? Crosby is great, and I don't watch every game he plays, but when I do, I just don't seem a dominant force like I remember Lemieux, Jagr (at his prime), Lindros, and even Brett Hull being.

I don't know why, but i'm not excited about Stewart. I wouldn't be upset to see him gone. I don't want anything to do with Callahan. Don't need a high priced guy without much (if any) upside left. Whatever contract he likely signs, it will not be worth it at the end of the deal. Overpay someone now, make sure you aren't taking a big cap hit on an older play just about the time you want the Sabres to be good. Erhoff I wouldn't mind seeing gone, if the deal is right. I'm actually OK with John Scott on this team next year. I'm not a hockey scout, but when I saw him play, he wasn't 100% terribly awful to the point of utter futility. If this team is going to lose agian next year to get a higher pick, then have him around, he can play F or D so in case of a rash of injuries that 'versitility' may prevent you from having to call up too many players from Rochester that you don't wan to call up.

I agree with what you say to a point, but where plus/minus can be useful is in comparing a player to himself. You might not find value in comparing one player to a different play because of the things you said, but in comparing a player in the regular season to himself in the post season (where he is playing with the same players as he did in the regular season) it becomes slightly more useful.

I checked the score online, I think it was in the second or early third period and the Amerks were up 3-1 over Chicago. I just checked now to see the final and the lost 4-3. Not good to give up 3 straight at home in the playoffs in the last 20 minutes.

What do you consider 'clutch'? Is it moments in a game (scoring the game winning goal, even if you had a bad series), memorable goals (Crosby in the Olympics vs Miller in OT gold medal game?) I like to look at how well do you do over a LARGE sample size in big games. For Example, lets look at 3 players who are debated over if they are 'clutch' or not, normalizing their stats 'per 82 games': Danny Briere: Regular season, 26.8 goals, -1.5 +/- Playoffs: 37.3 goals, -5.1 +/- His goal scoring improves in the playoffs by almost 40%, but his plus/minus is about 3.5 worse. Sidney Crosby: Regular season, 40.8 goals, +18.4 Playoffs: 38.1 goals, +12.39 His goal scoring goes down in the playoffs by 7%, and his plus/minus is 6 worse. Alex Ovechkin Regular Season, 51 goals, +5.67 Playoffs: 43.8, +12.7 His goal scoring goes down in the playofs by almost 15%, but his plus/minus is 7 better. So what does all this mean? Crosby is basically the same player in the playoffs that he is in the regular season over a large sample size. His numbers are SLIGHTLY worse in the playoffs, but that can be due to better competition and fatigue. He is very good in the playoffs, but not any more 'clutch' than he is any other time game in and game out in the playoffs. Ovechkin is even more productive scoring goals int he playoffs than Crosby, and has a better +/-, but once again, his numbers are close enough to the regular season to say he is pretty much the same player. Not "un clutch", but not better. Over a long period of time, Danny Briere has about the same numbers scoring as the other 2 do in the playoffs, but for him it is a vast improvement over his regular season numbers. He is a MUCH better performer in the playoffs than the other 2 compared to the regular season, so in my mind, he is an example of someone that, over a long time, is more 'clutch'. 2 other players of note: Henrik Zetterberg goes from 30 goals in the regular season to almost 37 in the playoffs, an improvement of about 23%. Patrick Kane goes from an 82 game average of 28.3 in the regular season to 33.6 in the playoffs, an improvement of almost 19%.

I don't think this year would have been totally pointless, but if the Sabres do something 'silly' like finishing 4th or 5th worse...and assuring themself of the 6th pick, I'll be very unhappy. The problem is this...they have to finish last to get one of the top 2. There were times this year where finishing last was at least a little in doubt. It might be harder to finish last next year.....the 3-4 teams that are really REALLY struggling by the mid way point of the season may do what the Sabres did this year..and trade off a bunch of assets...and the race will be on to the bottom. The Sabres needed their total collapse after the trade deadline to assure the bottom spot....it may be harder to do that this year, as the 'youngsters' they have may be a bit better than they were last year.

The picture that is looking at downtown (toward the Northwest) from what it says will be the hotel lobby...if there was ever one SINGLE picture to justify getting rid of the Skyway, this is it.

I truly don't like saying this (because I don't like the guy) but at his best, I think Chara is the best D-man I have seen (overall, but Paul Coffey was remarkable in the 1980's)

I don't know, I guess I'm in the minority here, but I think Stamkos is really overlooked alot. He is just as good, if not slightly better, of a goal scorer than Ovechkin, while playing a better 2 way game and putting in more effort. As far as Crosby, Stamkos is a much more productive goal scorer.