mjd1001

I never got the impression that Risto was part of that clique, or any clique. In the very little we could tell from the outside, I thought he had a much better attitude about being in Buffalo than Sam and Jack. The issue with Risto for me was simply, he wasn't that good at all. Of course We/I could be wrong and he could have been a major problem in the Lockeroom.....but personally I just viewed him as a Girgensons that played the back end with a lot more minutes and making a lot more mistakes.

I agree. This was brought up before but it is also worth considering...IF Sam had stayed here, he would likely be a Center (where he was moved to last year and played well). If he was your #1 Center going into this year...or more simply a guy on the roster that was going to take up a LOT of minutes at center, would Tage ever have been moved to Center at the end of training camp? and even if he was how much of an opportunity would he have been given there? If Sam was here he might be producing, but instead of a Tage Thompson playing at Center approaching 40 goals, you might have still had your Tage Thompson at wing struggling to put in 15 goals and be noticed at all.

I never figured out his usage. It seems like EVERY coach he had here wanted him on the ice all the time, even though he just wasn't that good. Was it a case of him being the best among a group of awful D-men? Maybe. But it more seems like coaches see his physical talent (size, skating, shot) and just think he is the most TALENTED D-man they have so they can't resist putting him out there. Even though in the end his decision making will be a detriment to the team, he always gets a lot of minutes. He did get 2nd pair minutes in Philly, but still averaged between 21-22 minutes per game. Problem for Philly now.....he is resigned for $5.1 million for 5 more years. Not many teams will take that off your hands. It will not cripple them cap-wise, but they are overpaying now for someone who is better suited on a winning team as a low-minute 2nd pair guy or a 3rd pair guy. To me Philly is overall in a kind of no-mans land. They had an awful season this year. They don't seem like they will be racing to the bottom of the standings, but don't have much to look foward to. They are not cap strapped and have some flexibility, but not a lot. They will get a high draft pick this year, but aren't loaded with top prospects. They aren't in an awful situation going foward, but there isn't a lot there to turn them around into a contender quickly.

Older thread from back in October. Interesting the Sabres finished with 75 points...which is by far and away the #1 choice of those who voted in the poll.

Interesting Anderson and Pysyk will be speaking to the media, seeing how they aren't going to be under contract for next year.

I haven't come across anything yet, so did anyone know what the attendance figure was last night. Either an official number released or anyone at the game and has a good guess? Years ago it was easy to find attendance figures game by game posted, I can't find them anymore. Just curious what the attendance was last night, and honestly most of the other home games this month.

Ok, I am not disagreeing with your basic premise, but if we look at the last 2 months of the season, among those wins you know who they also beat? Toronto (3 times), Minnesota, Calgary, Pittsburgh, Nashville, and Carolina. So yes, all of their losses were to playoff teams, but they also beat 8 playoff teams in that stretch. it isn't uncommon for very good teams to have losing records during the regular season against playoff teams (I think at one point this year, Calgary, Tampa, the Rangers, Boston, Washington, and Nashville ALL had losing records vs teams that were in contention for the playoffs) So yes, I agree with you they not only lost to some of the top teams, but some of the losses were brutal...and except against Toronto their wins against playoff teams were a lot tighter. They have to get better there. But if I do look at the last 2 months, I am overall encouraged at their performance vs top teams. Early in the year, or a couple years ago, I would expect most of those games to be almost automatic losses. The fact they went almost .500 vs playoff teams the last month for me is good progress.

I'm happy for him. After all those years, it has to be hard to leave doing the game, but at the same time, it might be nice for him to step back and have someoen else do all the prep work and just be able to sit back and do what he wants with his time, and probably watch any of the games he wants, how he wants form where he wants, and just enjoy it without the hours and hours of preperation.

Ok, a lot of things could change....the team could play differently in front of a different goalie...etc. But, strictly by the basic number: -Ulmark has a save percentage this year of .914. His career is .913. Last year with Buffalo was .917. 2 years ago .915. So, it seems like he is consistent...with Buffalo, With Boston. His whole career, etc....you are getting about .915 out of him. -The Sabres as a team have a .894 save percentage this year. Lets say Ulmark here would get the majority of the games played. 60 games (yes that is high but for argument sake) -Over 75% of the games played, the strict numbers say with an .915 save percentage, the Sabres would allow about 40 goals less. Right now the Sabres are a -54 in goals scored/allowed. With 40 less goals allowed, they would be a -14. minus 14 puts them slightly worse than Winnipeg and the Islanders (both at -8) and close to Dallas. No other teams are in that area. So where does that all shake out? 'By the numbers', about a point per game, or about 80-82 points, maybe a tad more (dallas is a bit of an anomoly here) is where they would be now. By the numbers if you calculate it that way.

A little off topic here, but another thing about the NFL (honestly a lot of sports) is the fantasy and gambling aspect. It is OK for me if that is allowed...and I understand people really like their fantasy teams and gambling. But being blasted with it over and over is turning me away for sure. Sometimes I'll listen to WGR, and you have commercials during the breaks for gambling sites....then you have commercials read by the hosts DURING the show...and then on top of it you have conversation between the hosts talking not about the game, but gambling and fantasy in addition to all that. Again, if anyone likes gambling and fantasy fine, but just not being able to escape it at all gets me to turn off the sports talk/game sometime and look for something else.

The first option...it says "Mostly watching the Sabres game, only checking in on the draft occasionally or not at all." The 'not at all' part is I think what you are looking for/missing.

I'm getting close to where you are. I used to watch every game I could. Wouldn't miss a single minute of the Bills, watched 3-4 other games per week parked on the couch staring at the TV. But with me it happened gradually. Missed a few of the other games at first..then stopped watching all the Bills games. Now, I 'follow' the bills, follow the story-lines. Read and participate (somewhat) in discussions about them. But I don't think I have watched a game from start to end, seeing every play, in a few years. Part of it is not much is new to me anymore (I have seen all the comebacks I need to see, no one handed catch I can see now I haven't seen before, etc). But a bigger part of it is the commercials, the pace of the game, and just EVERYTHING being overhyped. I said it in another thread on here, but basically when I get to the point where I feel I am overloaded with a topic or sport...where I can't get away from it...where there is just so much hype and attention...it turns me away. I know their goal is to make something so big that people feel like they 'just can't miss it' but to me it does the exact opposite. I get too much 'overload' from the attention and usually look for something else to do.

I agree that I thought Boston would be not as good as they are for a while now....but personally I think Marchand and Bergeron are a bit better than the top players on Vegas as their age, AND Pastrnak is better than pretty much anyone on Vegas (my opinion). Their D-core (Boston) also has their best players being the younger ones, as opposed to Vegas. McAvoy, Lindholm, and Carlo get 20-24 minutes of ice time per game, and their average age is only about 25. The Vegas back end is where they really are having an aging problem.

I'd normally watch both, but I'm going to spend most of the time with the Sabres tonight. I have lost interest in the NFL draft over the years. I think I am the opposite of most people, but the more something is hyped up, the more attention it is given and advertised and talked about...the less I seem to care about it. In this case that applies to the NFL draft for me.

Just curious what the plans are for most of us tonight, to spend more time watching the Sabres or the First round of the NFL draft.

According to Cap friendly, basically all of them. Stone and Pietrangelo, No Movement Clauses. Pacioretti, Karlsson, Dadanov, Marchessault, Martinez, and Lehner all with at least modified No-trade clauses. Take out Eichel, and that is all of their top 5 paid forwards, their 2 highest pad D-men, and their highest paid goalie all with limited no-movement deals or more. All of them over 30 years old by next year.

You have that 100% correct I'm pretty sure. Eichel is not generational as many of us have said many times. His single best year in the league, the year some people thought he should be an MVP candidate, he finished 10th in the league in scoring. Most every other year he was farther down the league leaders than that. He would probably be better served, and more useful, if he was viewed as something close to a Phil Kessel type player. Don't give a 'C' or an 'A'. Put other players around him that you make CLEAR to Jack...those other players are the leaders, those other players speak for the locker room, the team. Those other players are the ones who take all the media sessions. Jack gets all his PP time and 1st or even 2nd line minutes. The problem is, Jack himself still seems to think he is better than that. He still thinks he deserves an 'A' or a 'C'. Jack seems to think he deserves all the ice time and that everything on the ice should go through him.

Going forward it is going to be really tough for Vegas as we all know: -They are up against the cap, they likely will have to move pieces they don't want to -This is not a young team that is still getting better and growing. Other than 'superstars', most NHL forward peak in production in their mid to late 20's. Mark Stone will be turning 30 next year. Pacioretti 34, Karlsson 30, Marchessault 30, Dadonov 34, with virtually no-one under the age of 25 coming up looking to make a big contribution. D-isnt any better, their top 2 paid guys will be 33 and 35 next year. -Not only don't they have cap space to make big moves, but those guys can still be productive but they aren't getting better at that age. What moves can they make to get better? As much as Vegas fans and their message boards want to move some of those guys to 'clear up room', who else is going to take them at that age and their contract and give Vegas a younger, more productive guy back? Not going to happen. Who knows what the Kings are going to do this offseason, they may be the team I can least figure out going forward...so...If Eichel comes back full strength, gives them 40 goals and 90+ points I can see them making the playoffs, but I can't under really any circumstance see this aging team being on of the top teams in the league anymore and making any kind of run in the playoffs for the rest of Eichel's contract there.

When players get a lot of un-related injuries in their career, I don't usually think they are 'injury prone' due to their body just being more fragile than anyone elses. However, as you mentioned, it could be related to their style of play. The parts of the ice you spend your time in...how much you engage in physical play, maybe even something as simple as how your body is positioned when battling for a puck on the boards....all that can be related to how much/how often a player gets injured. I'm not there with Eichel being 'injury prone' yet, but we are for sure on the lookout if that keeps happening. Another 1 or 2 nagging injuries that cause him to miss time in the next year or so..and you might have to think he is 'injury prone' and likely to miss time due to his style of play, if nothing else.

Same here. Days 1 and 2 was body soreness and bad headaches. Days 3-4-5 were a bad cough (2nd and 3rd nights so bad I couldn't fall asleep) Days 6 and 7 I lost my voice Better on day 8, back to normal on day 9. Now it is 2 days after that and I woke up today with a bad cough again.

Who do I want to win? Really anyone but the Rangers or Leafs (most annoying fan bases, and to me, yes, more annoying than Bruins fans). Who do I think? Take out the favorites (that is no fun), but as a dark horse I think Edmonton is playing really really well lately.

I understand where you are coming from, but how big of a topic Eichel is, how he is a spotlight player in the NHL, how he was viewed by some/many as the 'savior' of the Sabres...he IS GOING to be talked about...and I'm fine with it..that is what message boards are for. If every time one of us got tired of talking about a topic and requested everyone else to 'move on' from it, this would be a very quiet and boring place to visit.

Interesting line combos for Vegas today:

We have gotten to the point where, as others have said, the discussion has gone circular. Same points are getting repeated....and not many people are moving off of their point of view. That is fine though, that is what discussion boards are for. I'm still of the Opinion that Eichel isn't close to the generational player we wanted him to be when he was in Buffalo...and he is not as good as Vegas thought he would be when they traded Tuch, Krebs, and a first for him. It seems like many Sabres fans (when he was here) and Vegas fans now wanted/expected him to be a top 5 NHL scorer, a potential 40-50+ goal, 100+ point guy, who can carry a team on his back. What he appears to be now is a guy who is 20th or so best in terms of scoring (his best year, his CAREER year got him to #10 in the league), a guy who will get you 30-35 goals and 90 points, and doesn't have the mentality to carry a team on his back. He might crack 40 goals and 90 points in the next year or two, but that would become his 'career' year, not the norm. Oh, and that is IF he is fully healthy for an entire season, something that with him seems less likely than with most other players. If he comes back strong next year and proves me wrong...breaks the top 10 in scoring and is the primary reason Vegas makes the playoffs, then he will prove me and a lot of other people wrong. But by this point, he no longer gets the benefit of the doubt that a season like that will LIKELY happen...to me it is likely NOT to happen until he proves it. Here is the what I would really like to know: How many people here (what percentage) would like to undo the Eichel trade if he was willing to stay here for the rest of his contract? How many people here (what percentage) at this point would undo the ROR trade?

many versions of it out there, here is one: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-value-nhl-draft-picks/ Another good one: https://myslu.stlawu.edu/~msch/sports/Schuckers_NHL_Draft.pdf Bottom line...Of course you want the higher pick, but by the time you get down into the teens, there really isn't much of a difference between picks 16-17 and picks 20-21.