mjd1001

Again, I love how when people dont' agree with something they start acting like angry teenagers and responding with animated gifs. I never ever said anything about hockey being a team sport or not, did I? What you are missing is the fact I said that ROR is very Good, but NOT good enough to have a significant impact on making the team even close to a playoff team. I am guessing you are all throwing gifs back at me because you have nothing, NOTHING at all to respond to the above line? I'll await your animated gifs as confirmation of that.

Your last line, that is real mature. lol

Not at all, not when the team didn't even sniff the playoffs his 3 years here, when he was in the statistical prime of his career, and when the team got considerably better the year he left. Not saying he was bad, but no, he for sure did not make a difference on his Sabres teams in terms of getting him to the playoffs. Sorry for all those ROR fans that it doesn't fit your narrative, but its true. He simply was not a difference maker on the Sabres teams he was on. A cute little gif doesn't make your point for you, sorry.

I think Hagg could get you a 4th or 5th rounder possibly..Pysyk maybe a 3rd or 4th. The question is, would the Sabres take that? They might just think the little chance a 4th or 5th rounder has of turning into a regular NHL player 3-4 years from now might not be worth taking a guy of the roster that can help the young guys this year (even if only helping a little tiny bit)

We will never know anything that didn't happen, but the fact that when he was on this team he wasn't a difference maker in terms of the team even contending for the playoffs....well, I'll stick by my statement of him not making a difference in terms of them making the playoffs. Certainly not in the past...and I'd say Tage gives them a better shot in the upcoming years vs an aging OReilly.

Very few are doubting how good the Panthers are, but I have watched a few of their games and took a deep look at their roster....this team should be dominant for the next few years. I'm talking hard-to-lose-the-division, Tampa level dominance. Up front they have 6 guys who are playing at a 20-30 goal, 65+ point pace (in some cases a lot more than that, Barkhov is at a 50 goal pace, Bennet and Duclair at a 40+ goal pace) ALL of those guys are 25-28 years old....just entering the prime of their career. ALL of them are locked up on contract through at least this year and next year....With Reinhart, Bennet, Barkov, and Duclair locked up beyond that at only $24 million for all 4 of them per year. Cap hit will not be an issue for this team and they can keep ALL of their up front core without a problem and add to it each year. On the D-side of things: Ekblad, Weeger, Forsling, and Gudas are near the top of the league in terms of how quality of a top 4 core they are. All of them are locked up for at least 1-2 more years, with Ekblad for 3 more years after this year. Their ages? 26, 28, 25, and 31. They are pretty young also. Having Montour locked up for 2 more years at only $3.5 million as part of your third pair is pretty good too. I can't see how this team can screw things up. They are going to be tough to get by, and should pretty much take one of the top 3 spots in the division automatically for the next 2-3 years at least. Tampa, Boston, Toronto, a rising Detroit team and everyone else (including the Sabres, of course) are going to have to scrape and fight for one of the 2 remining playoff spots in the division.

I won't worry about it much by then if it does happen. I EXPECT the Sabres to be a much better team then (in 4-5 seaons), Guys like Mitts, Cozens, Dhalin, Quinn, Power, Peterka, all will be entering their prime then. Tage and Tuch will be at the end of it but hopefully still productive. Eichel at that point will be 30, and with him having numerous injuries in his career already, likely at the end of the prime of his career. Still a dangerous player? Yep, likely so. But if he signs a 5-7 year contract as a 30 year old for $10-$12 million per year (or more, pending the cap), I view that as something that will hurt the Bruins (Cap wise) more than it will help them. The Bruins up front look pretty weak a few years out, and their farm system has basically no blue-chippers.

Right now that trade is looking very very good for the Sabres. Why? They were one of the worst teams in the league with ROR here. when he left what changed? Not much. They were bad with him, they were bad without him. However, what they got in return...the piece they got in Tage, looks to be more valuable to this team now and going forward than ROR was. If ROR stayed with this team, they would still have been bad and he is now on the wrong side of 30 years old. He would not have made a difference in the Sabres making the playoffs the last couple of years, and going forward Tage looks like a LOT better player for when/if this team is good. The ultimate question I ask myself is...if I could, would I un-do the trade? The answer is a very big No.

I'll watch. I love Saturday afternoon games. Wish the Sabres would have a lot more of them. I can watch the Sabres during the afternoon....either just sit and watch the game or have it on while doing some light cleaning or cooking or catching up on emails or other stuff on the computer. Then it leaves the evening free.

I agree with you that good goaltending is the easiest/quickest way to get better fast, as getting a good goaltender involves only one player. However, as a fan I am more interested in seeing this team score more goals overall than I am in seeing them allow less. As of me writing this, the Sabres are 7th from the bottom in goals per game allowed, and 8th from the bottom in goals per game scored. In terms of pure goal numbers, they are 69 goals allowed behind the best team in the league allowing goals.....and 71 goals behind the best scoring team in the league. So, they need to improve equally in both areas. While again, getting a good goalie would be quicker, I'd rather see them lean more toward the offensive side than the D-side of things. Either way to be a truly top team....through 50 games they need to 'flip' about 70 goals from where they are now..a combination of what is scored vs what is allowed. Top playoff teams should be about +30 or better in goals for vs allowed...the Sabres currently are -38. Break it down further, the Sabres currently are at .900 for team save percentage. League average is about .905. To break into the top 10 (I'd consider that good) you need .910 Top 5 is .913-.914. Lets say the Sabres got one of the top goalies in the league, and his save percentage was well above .910..so that when you include games played by the backup, you would get the Sabres to .910 as a team. If everything else was the same, and the Sabres had a team save percentage of .910 (which would make them top 10 in the league) instead of what it is now...they would have allowed 17 less goals than they have so far. Break that down however you want (there are tons of ways to do it) but according to league averages, that would likely make them a 50 point team right now instead of a 40 point team. (5 more wins). But still 8 points out of a playoff spot in the east. They need a better goaltender than can play 60+ games and be a top 10 guy. But that won't matter or change anything until they can at least slightly reduce quality shot attempts against that goalie....and to be able to score a LOT more goals also.

I actually think he has a good point. Your point is the one that is cherry-picking things. 102 potential NHL players you mention doesn't matter, when the ice time he had was not with most of those 102 players...his ice time was mostly with the 11 players he did mention compared to the 'potential' ones you bring up.

Of course, you can take those multiple picks and make them better. It might not always work but maybe take a pick that is in the late 20's in the first round, package that with a 2nd..and move up to the late teens or early 20s. Then take that pick and package it with another mid-first rounder, and move up to the 10th-15th pick. You have a find a team willing to move, but if you are pretty full of prospects and another team is picking there and wants more quality prospects, then go for it. If you are going to trade anyone, you get the best thing you can for him, even if that is a pick. Doesn't mean you have to use that pick in the draft. If it has value, it can be moved for a player in the offseason that might not be available now..or moved with other picks to turn them into a better pick.

Keep him.

I don't use the 'on pace' thing to predict where a player will end up, but it is a good snapshot of their production on a 'per game' basis in terms we all know. I think the bigger thing with anyone on the Sabres team (Tage, Skinner, etc) is that we are using that 'on pace' thing and comparing it to other years, without looking at just how much scoring is up in the NHL this year. 36 goal pace is not what it used to be even a couple years ago..... That 36 goal pace has Skinner ties for 41st-43rd in the league right now. Yep, 40 players are 'on pace' for more than a 36 goal per 82 season. You want to crack the top 20? Better be on a 44 goal pace. Want to break into the top 10? 48 goal pace. I'm happy with Skinner turning things around, and producing the way he is...it is a heck of a lot better for the Sabres than what he was doing for the last 1.5 seasons before this one. Just there still is room to 'pick up the scoring pace', certainly to come close to justifying his cap hit.

You hit it on the head there. Whether it is a new owner, a minority ownership group...anything like that, a quick buck can be made if you are patient enough to see this team moved. Look, the only way the team stays here is if the owner is local or a huge fan of the franchise (city and team name). As you said...this team might double in value (or more) the minute they are moved to a different city. In all honesty, if I'm one of the dozens and dozens of potential sports teams owners out there that wants to make a quick buck (or couple hundred million of them), there may be NO franchise better in any of the major sports leagues to want to target to buy, and move, than the Sabres. Also remember that if the Bills get a new stadium, there is very little chance of the Sabres getting a new building anytime soon. Re-locate this team and there is a good chance a new city will BUILD you a brand new Arena. What would be better for revenues as a new owner? The Sabres playing in a Market the size and value of Buffalo, with dwindling fan support (currently) in a 25-30 year old building that wasn't even the best when it opened and with no new building in site? Or the same team with a fan base that sells out every game because the franchise is new to them, with potentially a brand new building, and in a market size/value that is double (or more) what Buffalo is? The Sabres are probably the #1 choice for the ability to buy low....move, and either sell high OR take in much higher revenues. That is the reality of it. I would be very, VERY afraid, as a Sabres fan, of ANYONE owning this team besides the Pegula's or someone with huge city-of-buffalo ties.

Yep, just like the bills were rebuilding for the greater part of 2 decades and it was correct to have hope at some point.

"Winning the trade" is going to be defined by each person based on their allegiances. 1.) To those fans of Eichel, this trade will never be won. If he does well in Vegas, they will say "he could have/would have" done the same thing if he stayed in Buffalo and judged the trade that way. If he doesn't do well in Vegas, they will say "The Sabres ruined him and they didn't get enough back for what his 'talent' was." 2.) On the other hand, those who didn't like/want Eichel anymore will say the trade is a win, because you traded a 'damaged' asset and you got something of value back for someone that if he was still here would 'poison the locker room and the young guys in it'. So to them, the trade is already a win. Personally, I fall somepace between those two, but I lean more toward the 2nd. Sure, the Sabres may have mis-handled him and his entire career up to now, but when the trade happened, you have to deal with what you have at that moment, not what 'could have been'. Eichel should NOT have been disgruntled with the Sabres and probably wanted out...but it looks like he did. Since that was the case at the moment of the trade, I think the Sabres did pretty well in it...they just might be better off with Tuch and Krebs and that pick than they would be with a disgruntled Eichel for 4 more years.

-I'm not sure it can happen, but I'd like to see a move for a young, NHL ready player (maybe a 22-24 year old D-man) that can be on this team going forward. -Win some games and be competitive, but get a top 5-6 pick. This is the LAST year I want to be thinking about high draft picks though. -No long-term injuries that carry over to next season -I want to see goals. I'd rather this team lose 6-4 than to lose 2-1. Win 5-4 rather than 2-0. Yes, I know everyone wants to see better goaltending and the D tighten up, but for me not at the expense of goals. -Make sure the young guys (including Krebs and Quinn) get to take part in a playoff run in Rochester. -Sign your prospects that are coming out of college (Levi, Portillo, Power, etc)

I'll agree with those saying that this has turned into some kind of side-show...but that is just my opinion. I don't have to watch and for those who do enjoy it, Its for them not me. I guess the key is the players also. If some fans like it, and the players have fun with it, then there is no reason for it to change. I'll just pick up watching these guys when they get back to regular games.

I don't remember the comment so I have a legit question, were there any other 'young' players he played with here that could fit the description? Ristolained, Eichel, Reinhart, Girgensons, and Evander Kane all were on the Sabres when Gionta was here, they all are former 1st round picks and all were under 25 years old at the time. Any chance it wasn't Eichel but maybe Sam or Evander he was talking about? Or was the context of the conversation pointing at Eichel for sure?

I think it has been said in this thread earlier that a lot of us aren't hoping he has a substandard career, and a lot of us don't think they 'kicked him to the curb'. He wanted out...justified or not..you aren't 'kicking someone to the curb' when they aren't buying into the way you are building your club. And as I and at least a handful of people have said in this thread, we don't hope he has a substandard career...many of us don't really care at all. If he wins the cup, fine. If he wins and MVP, fine. If he never gets 80 points in a single season again, fine. There is something that for a lot of people, they just didn't 'connect' with Eichel the way a fan should connect with a franchise player, and because of that it is easier when it comes time to see him leave.

It is way too early in both players development to make a final conclusion now. I'm not saying Mitts is going to be a star, but we saw nothing out of him until the flashes we saw last year on the 2nd half of his 4th year after his draft. On the other side you have a player like Dylan Larkin who was drafter only 15th in the first round and was productive from day one in the NHL. It is hard to judge a 1st rounder based on his production until 'usually' year 3-4 at least. Too many times young guys who were 1st round picks scored 10-15 goals a year at best, then when they hit that 22 or 23 year old mark their production shoots up to 25+ goals.

Don't 'use' your cap space just to 'use it', don't use it until you need to. Plan how you are going to sign long term deals to what you identify as your core. If that means you are under the cap for the next few years then fine. Don't force anything. The only thing I'd like to see this year and next year is if...some team that is tight against the cap at the deadline or offseason needs to utilize 'your' cap space. A team needs to dump high, expiring contract someplace....then take that player for a year...as long as that other team is going to give a quality young asset with it...or maybe flip their 2nd rounder to you for a 5th or 6th rounder for you doing so.

Agreed. Free agency should be used only in 2 cases: -You have a MAJOR hole in you can get a 2nd or 3rd tier free agent to fill that MAJOR hole that you know will be an improvement, but only if that 2nd/3rd tier guy comes at an affordable price. -You are a cup contender, not a playoff contender but a CUP CONTENDER, and you can over pay for that #1 free agent guy that you think has a chance of turning you from a cup contender to a cup winner.

I grew up with the classic blue and gold. I probably watched my first Sabres game as a little kid in the late 1970's, but I got really into them as a kid in the 1980s. So I was exposed to the blue and gold for years and years. However, I like the red and black better. Still do.