mjd1001

There is a middle ground here. Maybe Jack wasn't an 'awful' captain or even a bad person that created division on the team. It could have been that in terms of leadership, in terms of players coming together....he simply was not the catalyst to make that happen. We hear stories now about how this team is close, they hang out together, etc and the players/coaches think it is a good thing. We also heard that the 2005-2006 teams were that way because a lot of the key pieces got that way when they played in Rochester together. The Sabres teams since Jack got here didn't seem to be that way. Again, it may not be intentionally Eichel's fault...just coming in as the 'star' and 'savior', he may have never been in a position, or WANTED to being the team together (for what that is worth)

Exactly. Treat it as an offsides in a reverse fashion. As long as teams don't keep doing it anyway leading to so many whistles.

Its hard to tell from television. Lower bowl looks SLIGHTLY more full than opening night, and I mean slightly. But on some of those shots going into and out of break where you can see other parts of the Arena, there a huge patches of empty seats. Its more than half empty, probably close to the same as opening night.

too bad that the crowd doesn't look much bigger than the other night.

Even though the over-under betting odds are in the high 60's or near 70, I was already thinking this could/should be an 80-81 point team. Then you remember it is only 'one game' and you just lost 2 of your top 5 or 6 players for a few weeks to injury. Its hard so early. Until we see more, I WANT to say 81 points but I'm probably thinking more like 75 now, pending how long the injuries are for.

I think when Jack Eichel is on this team and playing...wearing the 'C', being the public face of the franchise, and being the overall 'fan favorite', with the biggest contract on the team.....then Jack Eichel feels he has pull with ownership and management and things go through him. A player in that position is the one who wants to be the first one the team talks to when they make a trade for someone. A player like him wants to have a coaching change 'run by him'. The media wants to talk to that player first. With Jack out of the picture, there is no 'one player' who does all that...or thinks he deserves all that. So there is a perceived void in leadership now that other players can step up into. Maybe this isn't the case, but a player like Okposo might not want to do something like this letter if Jack were still here and captain/face of the franchise because that would be 'stepping on Jacks toes'.

What will be their final point total over an 82 games this season? I don't think I saw an actual poll on this, so I'm wondering what everyone is thinking. I browsed a few gambling sites online, and I saw the Sabres anywhere from 67.5-71.5 as the betting odds. So, I apoligize if this was posted as a poll already (I didn't see it) but here just one game into the season, I'm curious as to where everyone is on this.

It is a Saturday afternoon game. If anything, you almost ALWAYS get a lot more kids/families at those games. Boston has been doing it for years...making almost EVERY saturday game they play a home game in the afternoon. I wouldn't mind seeing the Sabres push the NHL to make them do the same. Friday nights can be the 'weekend out night game', maybe have 1 or 2 Saturday night games, but I'd love to see Saturday afternoon games be as much of a thing here as they are in Boston.

Agreed. I think you might see someone called up before any road trip out of the Northeast, but that won't be until the Oct 28th game in California.

This was brought up earlier today, if his play fits in... My answer was no, it doesn't. Jack is a guy who IS fast but doesn't PLAY fast. More often than not, he carries the puck into the offensive zone, going over the blue line at 'half speed', then he starts to look around, controlling the puck in the center of the zone, to try to get something started that way. That is not what we saw last night. Despite displaying his speed on a few memorable rushes, that is not the game Eichel likes to play. He is more of a "see the ice, control the puck" kind of guy. If he was in the NBA, he would be more comfortable in a half-court offense rather than a fast-break offense, despite is pure skating speed. The issue with Jack is, when he is your captain, he is your highest paid player, your most 'talented' player, the the player the fans buy the most jerseys of......you don't have him adjust to the style of the coach or the rest of the team..instead you let him play how he wants to play. Maybe he could play this way if he wanted, but it seems he just doesn't want to. Anyone who says he fits into this style of play is just saying that and hasn't really watched the way he actually does play the game over the last few years.

If I had to make a wager at this very moment, I would be saying 81 points for the year. I would not be confident enough to wager anything on that though.

If this team ends up being an 80 point team at the end of a full season, I'd be very content.

I have said on this forum for a few years that Eichel is one of the slowest 'fast' guys I have ever seen play. By that I mean we know he is a VERY fast skater, and every once in a while he displays that on a 1/2 ice rush, but that is not his 'everyday' game. More often than not I notice him carrying the puck into the zone at medium speed, looking around and trying to set up something once he gains the zone, often slowing the play down once he gains the zone. That is NOT the way the Sabres played last night.

This is really fun to watch, but I need to see a few more games of it before I change my mind on this team.

I have to say, I'm not a big fan of Prince, but I think "lets go crazy" works after a goal.

As I posted last night my quality was decent, but certainly not 1080p high def, a little grainy and blurry. The biggest problem I had was buffering or the feed freezing during the leaves Canadians game. The picture would stutter once every couple of minutes, in about every 10 minutes it would lock up and stay that way until I backed out of the game and tried to restart it. He had to do that 10 times or more last night. I don't think it's our internet connection either. We've never had that issue with any of our other streaming services, and we have a very good premium internet connection with the router only one room away from the TV. The picture quality I would like to see better but it was acceptable. The buffering and stuttering of the image is unacceptable they have to address that soon.

I'm watching the Leafs-Montreal game right now. The streaming quality isn't great. Its OK, it is better than non-high def, but its certainly coming across lower than 1080p and there is an occasional 1/2 second freeze up. We have a good internet connection, and have watched other streaming services and sports that look better than this. Again, not AWFUL, but for sure it isn't as easy to watch as what we are used to.

I agree with this....and I'll take it one step further. A "Center" isn't now what it was 10 years ago, and in 5 years from now I think it will be even different. Years and years ago, a Center took most of the faceoffs. He played in the center of the ice. A left winger stayed on the left side of the ice, and a right winger on the right side. A 'Center' had certain defensive responsibilities that the wingers didn't have. The game was more 'rigid' that way. That is changing, and it CAN change more. The place the player lines up I think can matter less than we think it does. If a 'center' traditionally has certain defensive responsibilities.....Why can't the LW take those responsibilities in the D zone if he is better suited to do so? As the game gets more and more complex, I just think a good coach isn't going to force players into roles defined by traditional positions, a good coach will let players do what they do best, not mattering what 'position' they play. Its kinda like the NFL. A decade ago or more, an outside linebacker did certain things. An inside linebacker did other things. A safety did things. A DE did things..and you drafted players to fit those ROLES. Not anymore. There are so many 'hybrid' players now. You don't force a guy into a 'position'...but rather you let a guy (often times) do what he does best, and build a Defense, or an individual defensive play, around that. I guess that is a long way of saying...why can't the NHL have players who are 'hybrid' forwards....with a coach mixing and matching players not based on what position they each play, but rather on how well they work together regardless of what position they are assigned on the roster?

This is not a 'yes' or 'no' answer. They realize they may lose. They have set up the roster knowing the moves they make will mean the team is bad this year. But it isn't intentionally to lose as many games as possible.

So he won't be given the official "C", but for all intents and purposes, he is the captain, just not official. I guess you keep the letter open in case someone younger develops into the role as the season proceeds?

It isn't 'nothing', it is conversation about some new information (even if it is just conjecture). That is the point of having a message board, isn't it?

Who is cheering for that exactly? There are differing points of view as to what is an acceptable trade offer and what the timing should be, but just how is HOPING for a trade that is similar to the ROR trade?

Not really. Here is the reality....if no one is/was willing to pay his asking price, the his price was too high. Many times an Asset is not worth what you THINK it should be worth, but it is worth what someone is willing to pay. Remember, you aren't selling to just one team, you have the entire league to sell to, and probably 4-6 teams that are seriously interested in what you are selling. If you have 4-6 teams that want your asset, but no one is willing to pay the price, then your price is too high. It isn't a matter of him 'wilting'. If you want him to get his price and ONLY his price, then he is wilting....but 'fair value' is what someone is willing to pay. Its like selling a car/truck. My friend put a lot of money into his truck a few years ago. He wanted to sell it a couple years later. he was SURE it was worth $25,000. But after a full year no one was willing to pay his price. His truck sold a year later when he was willing to accept $18,000. He didn't 'wilt', he simply ended up lowering his asking price because a LONG time went by with no-one willing to meet his original price.

Sounds like it could be a new thread started by someone with some ideas...

This team has a lot of holes to be filled, it has a lot of room for 'prospects' to become regulars or stars of the future. With that said, you take the BEST player/prospects available in a trade proposal. If one of them happens to be a goalie, great, take it. If you get better players/prospects that are not goalies...then great you take them.