mjd1001

It is kind of a curse of being good and having high expectations. The reason the Sabres have the potential to be fun this year is the expectations are kinda low. Beating expectations is fun. The Oilers after going deep into the playoffs last year with probably 2 of the leagues top 10 players, expectations are deep, deep playoff runs and probably a Stanley cup appearance or win. When you have those high expectations, every loss, every bad PERIOD can bring angst and hand wringing for fans. Its not that different than with the Bills right now. If/When the Bills play a team that is drastically inferior and they lose (or just are losing at halftime), for many fans, that is not going to be a fun game and instead will be stressful for them. As Sabres fans, its nice we get to enjoy the 'ride up'. I have said it here many times, in Pro sports, there are really just 2 things that make a fanbase happy: 1.) winning the championship. 2.) Exceeding expecations. If you can do neither of those, many fans are going to be upset with the season.

Power leading the team in ice time through 2 periods, even more than Dahlin. After playing over 25 minutes the first couple games, maybe just trying to walk back Dahlins ice time tonight?

The difference between Quinn and Peterka this early in the season is Quinn still seems to be adjusting to the pace of the game, where Peterka seems like he is a half second AHEAD of what is happening on the ice. Peterka adjusting to the speed of the game and is making quick decisions.

Hinostroza has only looked good tonight. Have to find a way to keep in the lineup. Even if he only gets 12 minutes of ice time he makes the most of it.

OK, it is early in the year, but if there were 3 things I was sure about going into this year, it was Philly would be awful, probably the worst team in the league, Boston would be considerably worse, and Vegas would continue their 2nd half of last year slump by being average-to-below-average. Well, as of this very moment, they are a combined 9 wins and 1 loss between them.

Joki was late getting back on the Edmonton goal in the 1st, so a lot of that is on him but to be honest I haven't really noticed much else bad out of him the first couple games. Hes not playing like a star, but I don't think hes been awful so far.

About halfway through the game and 2 things are really standing out to me: 1.) Dahlin really really good, like top 25 in the league good. Not only is he scoring, but on many odd man rushes HE is the one who gets back first. 2.) Hinostroza needs to be in the lineup. He is noticable, doesn't make a ton of mistakes, and is around the puck a lot more than you would think a 3rd/4th liner would be.

Take a look at the replays of the Goals the Sabres allowed this year. The Collin White goal vs Florida was a direct result of Krebs not being able to handle a chip on the boards and the puck right away going to the front of the net where the goal was scored. The goal allowed vs Ottawa, Krebs was backchecking the eventual goal scorer but he simply could not catch up to him. One more step closer and he could have disrupted the goal but he was either out of gas, just too slow, or both. A bunch of other times when the puck was on the boards, it was pretty much a him on a one on one and very few of those times did the Sabres end up with the puck. He only got 9.5 minutes of even strength ice time in game 1, he was down to 8.5 in game 2, and now he looks to be on the 4th line. I'm not saying he is a bad player, but he is causing this team to lose possession by not winning numerous battles along the boards, and played a major role in 2 of the 5 goals allowed so far this year. He's not bad, but in the back 2/3rds of the ice he had a bad game for sure the first 2 games. I don't want him benched, but I agree with cutting his ice time unless/until he can 'figure out' that part of his game or until he can be slotted back in at Center.

I don't want to 'bench' Krebs as a punishment this early, but to me he has had the worst opening 2 games of any forward. Late backchecking, fumbling around some pucks in his feet, losing battles easily on the boards. Nothing 'intentional' on his part, but it just so happens the limitations of his game were very visible in the last 2 games.

This win was probably more important for the psyche of the fanbase than it was for the team itself. If they would have lost....Doom and gloom. Would have only Beat KC 1 time in the past coupe years in a game that didn't mean much. Behind KC for the bye, and home field. If you see them again, its probably going to be in KC AGAIN! With the bye week, 2 full weeks to think about this one. But with the win.....You beat them 2 of the last 3 ties (almost 3 out of 3) and all in KC..You are in the drivers seat for the bye and home field over them, and they just MIGHT have to come to Buffalo in January if you see them again, Enjoy the bye week and rest up.

Seriously? I thought they were about as split down the middle as could be. They had a lot of great things to say about the Bills. No idea where you are coming from with that.

Interesting, but it is a small sample size. The problem with that line for me is that Skinner and Olofsson are pure finishers. Its great they finish in different ways (Olofsson has that 5-15 foot shot and Skinner is honestly a good-handed garbage man), but neither really carries play, neither carries the puck well through the neutral zone, neither battles and wins along the boards. I'm all for putting them on the same line on the PP, where they can score goals different ways but I don't think their skills complement each other 5-on-5. (unless Tage is going to just dominate the puck through the neutral zone and control it in the offensive zone all the time.) Krebs is who I think needs to step up the most. In 2 of the goals scored against the Sabres so far this year, his play was lacking. Not lack of effort, but his lack of speed/positioning and his inability to control/win battles along the boards.

I agree. I can't argue he isn't great and it is hard to not say he wasn't the 'best ever' simply because of the numbers. Numbers rarely lie. That 92 goal season was insane. You can look at it another way through...for the first segment of his career (from when he started in the NHL until the year before Lemieux came into the league) 1977-78 to 1983-84, he had 356 goals. Bossy had 416 and Dionne had 351 over that same time period. Gretzky did have more goals-per-game though. From 1984-85 (When Lemiuex came into the league) until 189-90 (when Lemieux first started missing major games due to his injury/ and or illness), Gretzky had 321, Lemieux had 345 and Lemiuex did it in less games. Take nothing away from either of those guys, but a lot of it has to do with Goaltending just not being as good decades ago as it was now. When looking this up I looked at shooting percentages...over the course of multiple seasons, guys like Lemieux had a 20.6% shooting percentage, Gretzky was at 17.4, and Jari Kurri was 23.4% over 5 seasons.

I agree. Mario Lemieux always makes the top 10 lists, but I think a case can be made for him at #1. He did not have the longevity for sure, that is the biggest thing going against him, but of all the players I have ever watched play hockey, he was the one that could take over the game and be totally unstoppable more than anyone (including Gretzky). Lemieux and Hasek are the only two players that had players on the other side shaking their heads because at times there was NOTHING the other team could do against them.

I don't expect him to score every game, I'll give him a few games before I make any observations that are firm. I did not like his blind pass giveaway that led to one of the FL goals. That was the worst part of his game today.

Florida's first goal, Bryson didn't make a bad play but he rushed the chip/pass form behind the net. It was Krebs who lost control of it at that point and gave it away. Not all on him, but a little sloppy/rushed/not winning a battle by Krebs/Bryson that caused that goal. Florida's 2nd goal, both Power and Bryson were at the front of the net with just one Florida player, but FL got the goal. No major mistake by them, but a little more awareness with expereince might have helped. The bigger issue was abourt 10 seconds before the goal Thompson could have cleared the puck or carried it forward, but he blindly threw the puck in front the the Sabres net, Where it went right to Forsling to had a great shot that the reboud was put in. That goal is on Tage. Ekblads PP goal was a case where Girgensons went in deep, Lyubushkin stayed at home instead of moving up to cover Girgensons spot. To me, it looks like a possible mistake was made by Girgensons going in so deep to 'stay with his guy' where the Sabres already had 2 guys there, but it could have been covered up y Lyubuskin moving up, which he didn't do. SH goals allowed are tough to place responsibility on, but Girgs went deep to stay with someone, and the rest of the PK unit didn't adjust to that quick enough. Montours goal was just a case of a couple of minor things. Comrie being a bit sloppy with the rebound is the main one. You would hope with the puck in front of him AND 3 Sabres players surrounding him that the puck would not get out away from all of them but it did. None of the goals allowed to me were goals where Florida's talent just overwhelmed the Sabres. All of them are either correctible or a result of bad breaks/luck. The opportunity that led to the first goal was 30% on Bryson and 70% on Krebs. 2nd Goal is 90% on Tage. But those thing are (hopefully) correctible. Krebs worries me a little so far, and yes I know it is early. We were always told he thinks the game well and is skilled, but lacks speed and size. The first FL goal today was a result of him giving away the puck on the boards. The only goal they allowed against Ottawa wasn't his fault directly, but he was 1/2 step faster, he would have been able to interfere with Tkachuk (the goal scorer).

If Bryson had a good game great. I also understand they are going to want to give Power more ice time than him, no matter how they perform. What I don't get is if he had such a good game, why so little ice time. He by far and away had the least ice time of the D-men, and was even considerably lower than his average from last year.

I like to look at anything notable with ice times, to see how Granato is using the players: Forwards: Spread out pretty evenly. Tuch (17:07) and Mittelstadt (17:04) led. Thompson, Cozens, Okposo not far behind with over 16 minutes. Least went to Quinn(11:25) and Peterka (11:55). Krebs (13:29) also low. Asplund, Girgensons, Cozens led short handed ice time (all over 2:00) D-men: Dahlin (24:16) way out front. Bryson (12:19) lowest. Dahlin led on the PP (over 5 minutes pp time) and Samuelson led PK time (3:41 on the PK)

The plan is to do what they are doing, keep trying. Who COULD be the solution? Anderson and Subban are not. Comrie could be. UPL could be (I personally am more than 50% sure that one of them will be a very good NHL goalie). You have possibilities (still) in both Portillo and Levi. You drafted Leinonen. So you have a lot of 'lottery tickets', and these aren't 1-in-1000 chance lotter tickets. Based on their backgrounds/draft status alone odds say (but not guarantee) that 1 of more of them will be a solution. You can still draft goalies going foward next year as you get closer to getting your answer on the guys in your system now. You can always take a shot next year on a guy in the same situation as Comrie. And, If this team gets better you are more likely to be able to trade for/attract a higher level free agent next year and beyond. So are there any guarantees? Nope. But they are in a lot better position now for their goalie options going forward then they were just a couple years ago (now knowing that Ulmark is not an option). Am I happy with the current goalie situation? No, not happy. But I am happy with the quantity and quality of the pipeline/future plan.

Most teams (except for the very bott Most teams (except for the very bottom dwellers) average their 4th best D-man taking up 3.5-4% of the cap. Some are in the lower 3% range, some have their 4th D-man taking up 5.0-6% of the cap (Such as Brett Pesce in Carolina, Nick Leddy in St. Louis, Josh Manson in Colorado, or Travis Sanheim in Philly). If you can have a decent 4th D-man at 3.5%-3.8% of the cap or a good one at 4%-4.5% of the cap, you are in decent shape. Obviously the teams I mentioned above can fit, or deem it appropriate to pay their 4th D-man 5-6% of the cap. I judge a contract at what it will likely be at the mid-way point. In the 2026-2027 season, he'll be making that $4.2 million, will still be a young 26 years old, and of the few cap projections I have seen (Frank Serevilli usually updates this), the cap might be well over $90 million by then and possibly approacing $100 million a year or two after that. If they think he is going to be a very good #4 D-man, him getting paid 4.5% of the cap is about right. If he ends up being the 3rd best D-man on your team...at the midway point of his deal and still at the age of 26 improving...then him getting paid about 4.5% of your cap will be a bargain.

Happy to hear this. Is he a good coach? I think so, but don't really know. Is he likeable? To me yes, for sure. Take a coach I THINK is good for this team, add to the fact that I like him as a person/like hearing from him, and I'm all for this.

I'm not sure what you consider an 'old guy', Im in my 40s (old to some people) but I hate it too. Annoying. I had season tickets when I was a kid (with my father) and teenager form the lat 80's through the 90's and never remember it then, I think it must have started in the 2000s. Either way, it is something I can't tune out, I hear it all the time and don't like it.

I'm not as sold on that 2nd line as many others are. Ok, I think they will be a good 2nd line but a lot of what I hear is that it could be one of the 'best 2nd lines' in the league. I think poeple are expecting too much from Giroux. On the games I saw him play last year, he looked done, like really really done. 21 goals and 65 points last year was pretty good production, but he didn't look that good to me. Also, that line is quick but there is no size there at all, they might very well be one of the smallest lines in the league. I do expect that line to be pretty good though, and Ottawa should be better than last year. They started out awful last year, winning something like only 3 or 4 of their first 20 games. For most of the rest of they year (the next 62 games) they were more than a point-per-game team. Just that hole they dug at the beginning of the year was so big. They did add players in the offseason, and their young prospects like the Sabres, are one year older, so could they be a playoff team this season?

It appears who is captain in the NHL still matters more than it does in other sports, however, I think it is less of a thing now than it was 10, 20+ year ago. What it means on the ice is the guy with the 'letter' can talk to the officials when penalties are being sorted. As far as leadership in the locker room, I'm not sure how big of a deal it is to some of these guys. Lets say Tuch is a great locker room guy/leader/guys younger guys will come up to. He could simply think (or say), I don't need a letter. I can be available just as much for the young guys to talk to, for the coaches and management to approach or call on the side to discuss things with a letter or without a letter. I just get the 'feeling' that decades ago, the GM would call the 'C' and the 'A's "upstairs" when he wanted to get a feel of an issue in the locker room. But today in the 2020's, I think it is so much less formal. If Adams wants to talk to Tuch or anyone else without a letter, he just stops by....or texts or calls them....or has them stop by the office upstairs.

So does that mean you think they will start with 3 goalies in Buffalo? I guess I'm wondering if you send UPL down because they wan't him to 'get work' and with 3 goalies up in Buffalo they are splitting games 3 ways. Yet he appears to be the most deserving to start the season here. Unless you stick with the 'long term' plan and not let 2-3 weeks of performance by them change that.