mjd1001

Even though who is your 6th D-man is not usually a point of discussion, it will be interesting to hear why they chose him. As you said, maybe he wanted a faster guy out there? But on the other hand as I mentioned above, he only played about 6 minutes AND by having a player that you won't/cant play on PK, ALL of those minutes fell on Power. Had Stillman played and was on the PK, you wouldn't have Power forced to play 27 minutes, he could play his PP and even strength at a slightly fresher 25 minutes.

I mentioned this previously, but I'll say it again because it is in direct response to what you said. This team did not try to lose this year, they made a playoff push that that push was within a rigid framework of what they would and wouldn't do with other assets. They DID bring in players like Greenway and Jost and Stillman. Not top guys but they were at least decent additions and they didn't sell. Then Granto pushed hard for this team to win, you can tell by the ice time (bottom pair D-men getting 10 minutes or less with Power and Dahlin getting 25-28 minutes?) You don't do that unless you are really REALLY trying to win pretty hard. Adams had a framework to work within (either by his own standards or part of a larger plan by ownership) and he stayed within it. Granato pushed really hard to work with what he had, in my own mind sometimes pushing is best players a little TOO hard, but he did all he could to try to win. They just didn't have the assets this year, they did the best with what the play was. Agree 100%. I questioned why Power is getting pushed so hard (over 27 minutes of ice time). Bryson only played 6 minutes, and added nothing to special teams. I would imagine if Stillman was healthy, he could at least be out there on the PK instead of Power so Power could get a little more rest and get his ice time 'down to' 25 minutes focusing on even strength and PP.

If Dahlin isn't hurt (and that may be the issue) I'd rather have Dahlin get the 27 minutes and Power 22. I think each minute Power gives you with 22 minutes will be better than each minute he gives you at 27 minutes. Bryson only got 6 minutes last night. To get Power closer to 20 minutes (or even above) I'd give Bryson a few more. But as I look at the ice time breakdown, I see your point. Either Dahlin gets more (and he might be worn out/injured already) or Bryson gets more. You would think you can take SH time away from Power, but Lybushkin (who I think is actually pretty good SH) already was being used there, as was Samuelsson and Jokirahjue (they all got about 2 minutes short handed). Only Dahlin and Bryson didn't get SH time, and I have said numerous times before I have ZERO need to see Dahlin on the PK, that is when he should be getting his rest. So again I see your point. That #6 guy has to at least have the ability to kill Penalties. If Power and Dahline are out there half the time on even strength and the power play, then you NEED to give them a rest Penalty killing. That means ALL 4 other guys have to be at least decent on the PK. I'm talking myself in circles and ending up agreeing with you. So, for next year, I'm not saying you Don't want to ever use Power on the PK, but there may be games where you want his minutes on even strength more, so you need to have all of the bottom 4 able to penalty kill. Maybe that is where losing Fitzpatrick hurts this team. At least he could give Power/Dahlin rest on the PK could he was acceptable at that.

Offseason plan, don't overcomplicate things: 1.) Get Dahlin signed long term. 2.)Bring in 2-3 quality d-men. -HOPEFULLY on that is good enough to be a legit 2nd pair guy that can slot on your 2nd or 3rd pair. -Another one that is almost as good (2nd pair guy or a very good 3rd pair guy) that will be ok with competing for 3rd pair minutes. ALL 4 guys outside of Dahlin and Power need to be at least decent on the PK, so you can rest Power and Dahlin on the PK so their minutes can be all even strength or PP. -Finally, at least ONE legit NHL prospect for Rochester (maybe 2). Johnson would appear to be that guy if you can get him. 3.)Goaltending has to be better next year, but I don't focus too much time/assets on that except for the below: -Levi, UPL and Comrie all fight it out in training camp and the best 2 make the team, or... -Levi, one of UPL or Comrie, and a mid-level free agent fight it out for the top 2 spots. 4.)Up front: -Okposo hopefully will be gone. I resign Girgensons for PK and the bottom line. -VO? I'm not in the 'trade him at all costs' camp. If you trade him fine. If you keep him around, you have a streaky 25 goal scorer available. That isn't worth nothing. BUT, I have gotten to the point that if someone else wants him for some kind of value (a 2nd rounder, part of a package that gets you a good D-man), go for it. -Round up all the young guys in training camp and let them compete. Kulich, Rosen, Savoie, and the others. No one gets a spot, but one or two are available for ANYONE who shows they progressed over the offseason and proves it in camp. -Krebs, Quinn, Cozens, Peterka. They all showed progress this year. Give them specifics on what you want them to work on to be even better next year. Cozens play away from the puck has to get a lot better. Can Krebs get more pysical or faster? If not he needs to work on his anticipation and reaction time so he doesn't fall behind the play. Stuff like that with the young guys. So, nothing too specific, no big splashes (except for maybe the D-man). You make a handful of quality additions, don't think any of the young guys are or are not going to make the team. Give yourself enough options and on the exit interviews you tell the young guys how you want them to get better over the next few months and when training camp arrives, go after those roster spots.

Well, the issue is some (not all) but some, i'd say many of the assets traded at the deadlline, to beat the teams offer that got the player you might end up overpaying. I'd say about half of the trades, I thought the 'buying' team overpayed, all things being equal (by that I mean for the buying team who is looking to make a cup run, 'overpaying' might be the right thing to do). The Sabres giving up assets "A" and "B" for a particular player might make more sense when they are looking to make a deap cup run, but to get into the playoffs, maybe giving up "A" and "B" that are needed to make the playoffs is an overpay. Giving up "A" and "C" might make more sense in a balanced trade for THIS team, but that would not get it done when bidding against teams that are looking to get the assets for a cup push. I do understand that a move that could have been made might have helped this team make the playoffs, but we don't know what was avaialbe, what the asking price was, and remember you are 'bidding' against those teams who are making a cup push often times, and the players being dealt often have limited no move clauses that they would waive for a shot at the cup, not on a team just hoping to make it in. Of course, all of this is a lot of "What ifs" on my part, but it is tought to make a judgement either way as we don't know what the offers or asking prices were. If many of the vets traded had 'no move' or 'no trade' clauses, its likely the overall trade deadline was a little harder on the Sabres than on other teams those players would want to go to for a cup run.

I didn't read the entire thread so I'm not sure if this was brought up but....Power's ice time. I think it was over 27 minutes. More than Dahlin even. I know they want him to develop and he is playing well for a rookie, but at some point is it too much? From a fatigue/injury standpoint anyway? A lot of first pair guys who are pushing hard on a team in the playoffs get less minutes than that, I'm just wondering what the reason is for so much ice time for him. I don't think his development suffers if he is around the 22 minute mark.

Its always easy for the one who is poking and jabbing at other people to say 'lighten up' when they get any kind of feedback. I'll lighten up when you grow up. Just don't take shots at people when they have one or two posts with spelling errors. It adds nothing to the converstation. Nothing good can come out of a person correcting or joking about a spelling error or grammer error on an online sports message forum. You don't like it, thjen maybe doing something like going to the 'complaint Thursday' forum and complaining how many errors people make when posting is something that won't offend people. But responding to a post with a sarcastic comment about someone not spelling a name correctly? That is just childish.

I find it strange do you have nothing better to do but to point out other peoples mistakes in their posts, especially considered that some of us are responding on our phone and Auto correct sometimes makes changes for us. I personally have other things going on in my life where I'm not going to prove read every single letter of every single word that I post.

I kind of look at it a different way. If this was a pure developmental year, maybe a couple of the guys in Rochester would have been called up and given a couple game look at the expense of some of the veterans at the bottom of the lineup. Patrica and Quinn would have gotten even more ice time than they did, and we wouldn't have seen the young guys get their ice time cut down at the end of games as much as they have in some recently. To me this was always going to be a developmental year, but with the sabers being close to a playoff spot, I think Adams and Granato ended up pushing the ice time on the top line, and Dahlin more than they may have wanted to to actually give this team more of a chance to make the playoffs when this was supposed to be more of a developmental year.

We had a topic/thread at the beginning of the season dedicated to preditions for the year? Wouldn't it just make sense that the day the season ends, that topic be brought back so we can all read it and see how we (and everyone else) did?

Where did I say that they would not get better? Where did I say or even assume that I THINK they won't? The whole point of my response was that they should get better, just like anything there are no guarantees. Out of everything I wrong, somehow what you got out of it was "Why would you think 2 players who are 20 wouldn't get better?" lol

Not to hijack this thread with a different topic..but.... Thompson, Tuch, Skinner. Tuch and Thompson in their statistical prime, Skinner a bit past statistical peak but still should be good last year. Cozens, Quinn, Peterka. All 3 of them should still be gettting better statistically. If, IF Quinn and Peterka both continue to get better next year, is there a chance by the end of the year next year, this Cozens/Quinn/Peterka line could be just as productive/reliable as the Thompson line? Or if that were to happen is it going to be 2 years out? Cozens does lead the team in scoring and goals in the last 20 games.

A bit off topic, but as far as where the Sabres rank... Dylan Cozens now has more goals this year (with the season almost done) than Sydney Crosby, Sam Reinhart, Jack Eichel, Nikita Kucherov, Mitch Marner, and Artemi Panerin (all who have played about the same number of games/full seasons). Imagine the odds on that before the season started.

When you consider his ice time, he is actually 14th in the league in assists per 60 minutes this year. 15th when you only consider primary assists (I'm not a huge fan of secondary assists. You get just as many 'points' for being the 2nd last player to touch the puck on your team before a goal as you do for actually scoring? In my perfect world when considering the scoring champ for a year, scoring a 'goal' would get you 3 points, a primary assist 2 points, and a secondary assist 1 point--but that is a different discussion)

So, Greenway has scored a few times. Maybe he has the potential on this time to produce offense on a regular basis? The thing is, after watching him score a few goals, play a bunch of games now, I still have no idea what I expect of him going forward. I don't think there has ever been a player on a Sabres team that they aquired, that I have followed him on the ice as much as I can, that I have had less of an opinion on. I really have ZERO idea what he is or can be.

I'm not upset if in training camp next year you bring UPL, Comrie, Levi, and a low-priced free agent. Sure, find a vet guy who is 28-32 years old who is content with only 30 starts per year but is a good locker room guy and plays those 30 starts really well and I'll sign up for that...but good luck finding it! If you have UPL, Comrie, Levi and one other low priced guy fine, have them fight it out in training camp and preseason. If UPL gets better, if Comrie IS better because he was playing hurt this year....then whoever the best 2 guys are go with it. BUT, the only way that works is IF you find that 1-2 other guys for your D-unit. I really think this team can be good and a playoff team with what they have now in goal, as long as they upgrade the back end.

Maybe this is a bit obscure, but my complaint for today is how news article titles are written online. More and more stuff, even from what you would think are legit sites, is clickbait. Google or Apple news feeds, front page news from Microsoft of Google, all of it. What do I mean? Articles Titled "New York state may suspsend your liscense this week"....."Controversial actor confirmed to return to big budget movies", "You won't beleive what (celebtrity) said about their co-star". National Enquirer style headlines. The content of the articles in some cases is something I MIGHT be interested in, but then when you DO click on the article you have to read 4 paragraphs (and scroll through 8 advertisements and 3 more pop ups) before you get to what the article is actually about.

I realize this is not a popular opinion, but I bring both back and have a training camp fight to see who makes the team. UPL showed flashes this year (yes, I know both good and bad) and he still can get better. Comrie had some good games, and a lot of his 'bad' games came when he returned from an injury and there is a chance he was playing through something for most of the year. If, IF you can find someone who is clearly better than both who is OK with possibly being a #2 guy and is on only a couple year deal then do it, but that goldilocks situation might be hard to find.

As you said, for all intents and purposes this is 'their' and 'our' playoffs (meaning the team and us fans). If they lose, I view it just as if they were in the playoffs and lost. I know its not exactly the same, but in many ways it is.

I can't find it now, but there was an article on Ullmark a few weeks ago (NHL.com maybe?) that basically said his style, the whole way he plays net changed over this offseason. The Bruins coaching staff wanted him to make some major changes to his game, he resisted for a while, but he finally gave in and started playing a different style, and that is when his numbers got better. If anyone can find the link to that article, it was kinda short on exact details but interesting.

Tuch is proving to be as productive (or more) than Eichel, and might be a better fit here. Krebs is not even close to Reinhart. Krebs HAS improved this year, but he isn't even in the same zip code as far as Reinhart in terms of production, and he still loses a lot of battles and if someone gets behind him he rarely catches up on the backcheck. Krebs can get better and hopefully he will continue to do so, but him and Reinhart aren't even close at this moment. The Greenway/Risto comparison....Ristos biggest problem is the mistakes he made...Greenway so far look like his issue is that he doesn't make mistakes but doesn't do much productive (up until the last 2 days). Their overall value may be the same, but how they get there, I don't know yet.

A 40 assist guy on a line that isn't you top line is pretty good. That means you are making at least some plays and setting up things on the offensive zone that is positive. Its a big step up. Last year he wasn't productive at all, but the coaching staff said over and over and OVER (to the point most of us didn't want to hear it) that he was getting better and he was playing well in the ways they wanted him to play. Maybe all the stuff they see in practice does give them a lot more vision to players development than any of us see in a game. Mitts is used on the PP, but is mostly on the 2nd unit. His stats/goals might be a little higher if he got some first unit time, but that isn't going to happen. He's made a huge jump this year in his assist totals, if he just made a slight additional jump next year in his goal scorer, he could turn into a 60 point guy. He is also a player than can benefit from the D-unit getting better. I'm not sure how much ice time he gets with Dahlin, but the 'eye test' tells me the First line gets the benefit of Dahline getting the puck up the ice more than Mitts does. If the bottom 4 D-mean get better next year, it might have a marginal impact on Mitts line, giving him just a few more shots and a few more minutes of ice time in the offensive zone that may benefit stats/production even more. Sometimes a better D-corp leads to more production from the forwards, as they spend less ice time in their own zone and more of their ice time attaking.

A bit off topic of what is going on in the league, but I'm watching the Rangers/Caps games, and I don't know what it is, but there is just something about the Rangers uniforms that I don't like. I know, original 6 team, classic colors/uniforms, but to me, they just look like something that a High school team would wear. The seemed 'old fashioned/from the 70's design', but not in a good nostalgic way.

The part about him looking 3-5 years down the line, being calculated with who they add, wanting players reaching their prime...etc. That will not be what a lot of people who think this team needs a shot of veteran leadership want, but I'm good with it. BUT, I'm only good with it if they do something, they can't do nothing at all this offseason. If they pass on some good veterans, then fine, but make sure you find SOMETHING of value to add to this roster next year.

I'm not looking for super talented, top pair guys for this team. I need a balance of skill AND salary expectations. The key thing is getting someone good enough that you can not have to pay $5 mil per season or more, I WANT as much money available to sign as many of the key 'stars' on this team as possible. It doesn't have to be a big name. It just has to be someone better than Clague/Bryson, etc. Give me someone with 'average' skill (a decent skater, not a tiny guy..doesn't have to be super fast or huge, just someone who isn't overmatched). What I want is just 3 things: 1.) Wins 50% or more of battles for loose pucks in his own end. 2.) positionally sound...doesn't chase pucks all over like a dog chasing a squirrel, knows when to make a hit and when it is more important to maintain his position. 3.) good at identifying who to pass the puck to in his own end and good at making that first past. I don't need a guy with a 95mph slap shot, or a guy who skates like a top-5 fastest player on my team, or a guy who is 6'4" and 230 lbs. Just someone who can get that loose puck in my own and and that as quickly as possible pass it to a forward or Dahlin/Power and that is it.