mjd1001
-
Posts
6,054 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mjd1001
-
-
With Byram.... I'm still in somewhat of a purgatory with him.
He's young, he's skilled, he has the potential to be very good I think.
But I don't think he's been all that special with the Sabres. He looks the part with his skating and raw talent, I just don't see them as being a better team when he's on the ice though yet.
-
6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
Hi. Hello.
I've been beating my fist on the table to change up the defense. I've argued that we need 3 new defenders and others have been very critical as well... but what if the defense isn't bad, it's just the goaltending was truly atrocious.
You may be thinking, "wtf are you talking about Liger?!" Hear me out though. Let's talk about WAR. Ooo yea what is it good for? Absolutely SOMETHING.
WAR stands for wins above replacement. The idea being what if you could replace a player with your average NHL guy at the same spot. I was shocked to find this chart while reading about the Redwings. You may notice that Buffalo isn't near the bottom. In fact we're pretty good. Some of that is Dahlin is truly special and some of that is they only pulled the 6 guys with the must TOI so that limits our analysis but what if this defense group is actually fairly good, just unlucky because of atrocious gt?
What if the answer is simple? Switch out 1 defender and upgrade UPL? Is there some modicum of hope that this team actually isn't *****?
https://mystaes.substack.com/p/why-the-detroit-red-wings-missed
The Defense has not been great, but all year I have been saying in terms of goals allowed, the 6 guys on the blueline are the 3rd problem. Problems #1 and #2 were the goaltending and the support the Forwards give the D-men.
Cozens singlehandedly put the D-men in situations where they looked bad on the replays of goals allowed. He's gone, but Quinn wasn't that far behind Cozens and Peterka had his moments also.
Watch replays of any game, good teams included. They all allow goals and guess what? Usually about half the goals they allow on the replay has a D-man that looks like he his lost or has no idea what he is doing. Thats the NHL, a lot goes on and it happens fast?
So what is the difference between good teams and bad teams? What is under-rated is the support that the forwards give the D-men. To repeat myself, D-men look bad on goals allowed, for almost every team. Good teams have forwards that help out in the D-zone or Neutral zone so the D-men are simply put in that position less often than with Buffalo.
Yeah, and goaltending. The good teams have their D-men get turned around by elite forwards all the time, or they might 'choose the wrong guy' and let a good scoring chance against happen. So why do we think the Sabres D are so much worse? When those things happen, our Goalie allowed a lot more of those chances to go in. We see the replay of the D-men "not doing anything" where on many other teams the D-men play the puck the same way but if the goalie makes the save more often we don't see the replay and dwell on it as much.
This D-unit isn't great, probably not even good...but I think many on this forum put more blame on them when often it should be directed other places.
-
I don't mind Rob Ray all that much, but if he is retiring, I'd look forward to someone new. Just something new, ANYTHING new to keep my interest for a few games.
-
7 hours ago, Jorcus said:
The funny thing about the power play situation is I never saw a reason why he could not have played with Dahlin on power play 1 here. He is a better passer than most of the forwards we have.
Agreed.
Someone decided a decade or two ago that a PP HAD to have 4 forwards on it, and now its just standard thinking.
-
18 hours ago, Brawndo said:
I'm good with most of those...maybe not on the Quinn and Byram numbers though.
-
Why is Kevin Adams still GM...to answer the original question?
Terry Pegula likes him. Adams lets Pegula 'feel involved and heard' when Pegula wants to be. Adams likely never tells Terry he's wrong. When things go wrong Terry can go hide in Florida and Adams is there to take all questions and defend Terry and tell the media how great Terry is as an owner.
Adams is still GM for no other reason than Pegula wants it that way.
-
2
-
1
-
-
If everyone is so sure Byram is better than Power (he might be), then the league should know that and they should get a better return, especially considering he's not locked into a big deal like power.
-
1
-
-
On 4/24/2025 at 9:49 AM, dudacek said:
Here’s something I haven’t seen posted:
Benson/Thompson/Kulich was the 3rd most-common line combo used by the Sabres this year: 159.1 minutes. They scored 10 goals and allowed 8. Their xG% was 57.7 (4th on the team). And their Corsi was 50.9% (9th)
Benson’s next most common were:
- Krebs and Quinn 11th, 91 minutes 2 for, 2 against, xG% 67.7 (1st), Corsi 62.8% (1st)
- Cozens and Quinn 14th, 68.4 minutes, 2 for, 1 against, xG% 45.3 (12th), Corsi 53.4% (6th)
- Kulich and Krebs 16th, 57.7 minutes, 3 for, 2 against, xG% 61.2 (2nd), Corsi 58.1% (2nd)
One thing this doesn’t show you is the matchups. I’d bet good money he was playing against tougher opponents with Thompson than when he was with Krebs.
My biggest takeaway is that whatever line he’s on seems to win, regardless of what metric you use.
(I only used the 20 lines that played at least 50 minutes together, all numbers courtesy of Moneypuck)
When using the advanced analytics, you can look at it other ways also....that he performs BEST with middle-of-the Roster players or below (he 'brings their game up), and with Top of the roster players, those guys defensive production/goals allowed get worse (sometimes considerably) with Benson.
-Tage with Benson on his line was a +1 goal differential (goal allowed every 18.38 minutes). Tage without Benson was a +9. (goal allowed every 20.58 minutes)
-Tuch (in only a bit over 100 minutes with Benson) was a -1 differential (goal allowed every 14.79). Tuch without Benson was a +13. (goal allowed every 27.36 minutes, HUGE difference)
-Peterka was a -4 in only 63 minutes with Benson (goal allowed every 7.35 minutes). Without Benson he was a +15 (goal allowed every 19.42 minutes)
On the other hand:
-Krebs with Benson was a +4 (goal allowed every 31.33 minutes, those numbers are great), without Benson was a +1 in more minutes. (goal allowed every 25.89 minutes)
-Jack Quinn was a +3 with Benson (goal allowed every 43.4 minutes, great numbers again), without Benson he was a -10 without him (goal allowed every 16.87 minutes)
When digging into that part of the analytics....Benson defensively works best with middle-to-bottom forwards, not the top line guys. Why? I don't know, it could be a statistical garbage...but that numbers are the numbers.
-
1
-
1
-
52 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:
Of course you're not going to like Knies as much as Marner The real question is. Do you like Marner at $14 / $15 million or Knies at $7 or $8 (Whatever it is that Toronto can't pay)
I'm still going Marner (although I'd droppint out of the cost is $15m per year). At this point in his career, I don't think Knies is a 'game changer' unless he is slotted perfectly with other players. I don't want to pay someone that much money unless they can carry a line (even if its a 2nd line, I don't think he 'carries' it)
-
42 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:
Forget paying $15 million or whatever to get Marner.
figure out the salary it would take for the leafs to have to walk away from Knies and offer him that.
You would have to hope that they resign Marner at a significant number and Tavares doesn't take a huge hometown discount.
I don't like Knies as much. I really think his production is a result of being on a top line...he doesn't make a top line. Meaning I think Marner can elevate other lesser players you put with him, I think Knies is the one elevated by those around him.
-
1 hour ago, The Jokeman said:
JJP is arguably our 2nd or 3rd best forward. To me he's a staple, if you want to keep Byram you need to get Samuelsson's albatross of a contract out of here. I like Byram but at same be okay to move him, Samuelsson, Quinn, Benson, a prospect or 2 to get a top 6 guy. I'd love if could get Teravainen from Chicago to put on the 2nd line. I'm not sure what the Sharks could offer that be worth JJP given his age, contract and potential.
Ok, let me start out by saying I do not think Saumelsson is currently worth his contract.
But going forward, its under 5% of the cap, he may not be worth it but that is not al albatross of a contract. Its going to be under 5% of the cap, probably by the midway point of it 4% of the cap.
Can his play/career be saved? I know he can't stay healthy, but I thought as the year went on he played better, and in fact had a few pretty good games in the last month.
If you can get 60 games out of him on average, he IS a pretty decent penalty killer because of his size/reach and how much area he can cover while playing his spot....and if his play can maintain the level it did toward the end of the season, or even improve slightly...well, I just don't think it should be a priority to get rid of him just because of his contract.
-
56 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:
I didn't like putting Benson in the NHL straight from the draft. I'm not sure he'll ever be a top 6 guy. He just feels like another Krebs. I hope I'm wrong.
I'm somewhat there with you, at least for how good he is right now, I'm not as high on his game currently as some are on this board, but I think he has time to develop into a top 6 guy, but I think he needs more 'finish'.
I'll feel better about his development if next season he plays a full season, gets at least 160-180 shots, and shoots 10% or over. I think those are reasonable goals for him to have to show he will eventually be a legit 2-way top 6 guy.
-
I can't vote, none of the choices are close to how I think.
To me, it would be something like "he is a solid 3rd liner now that can fill in temporarily on a higher line, but needs to show more offensive 'finish' to make that permanent leap."
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:
Don't underestimate Rutherford. I bet he will offer Pettersson plus to NJ for the Hughes brothers.
The "plus' in that would have to be something even more valuable than Pettersson.
Jack Hughes also has injury issues, but when he is healthy I think he is a better player than Pettersson, certainly one that is more of a 'game changer'. And asking for his brother also? That is a heavy lift.
-
He looks like he plays hard. His metrics/analytics are mostly really good. Just needs to be a lot more actual production to back up that potential. He's played 2 seasons now, and is shooting under 10%, a sniper he isn't. Does he have to be? No, but if he is going to be an eventual fixture on the top 6, I want/need him taking closer to 200 shots per year instead of 100, and he has to convert on at least a BIT over 10% of them.
In terms of scoring chances, the numbers are 'kinda close', but with Tage on the ice vs not on the ice with Benson: Tage's number of scoring chances per minute are higher without Benson than they are with him. Their OVERALL numbers (including defensive metrics) are better with Benson, but he still needs to develop a bit more of his offensive game to get more ice time to me.
He is still very young so those issues above can easily change. But until they do, he's more of a 13-14.5 minutes per game guy (which is 3rd line minutes) than anything more than that.
-
1
-
-
I think there is an above average chance there is 'below average' movement in the franchise...the front office..the roster...everything...over the time until next season starts.
If that happens, without much 'new' to talk about, and with most of us posters with our own beliefs well established, this may become a pretty quiet place over the next few months.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
I don't believe the out of shape narrative.
They have a crappy defense and bad goaltending. Being in shape isn't fixing that.
Of course, unless one of the 'out of shape' guys was UPL and he was really, REALLY bad with it.
And who were the players who came in 'out of shape' and it hurt the team early on?
-Tage had 10 goals in his first 15 games and was a +6. Doesn't seem like he was dragging out there.
-Dahlin was playing through an injury in the first few games, but once he worked through that, he had 13 points in 14 games in November and was a positive player also.
-Peterka had 7 goals in his first 15 games.
-Tuch had 4 goals and 12 points in his first 15. A SLIGHTLY slow start from him, but I don't think he looked slow out there or lacking effort.
-Zucker or Greenway? Aren't those the 2 veteran guys that know better?
-Mcleod had 4 goals in his first 15 games. He wasn't getting much ice time early in the year, was the because he was one of the guys 'out of shape'? He just came from the team that was in the cup finals.
Through Thanksgiving the first month and a half of the season, this team had a winning record, they were in a playoff spot, They had 23 points in 21 games, a 90 point pace. If they were out of shape, why did they start the season 'relatively' good and then fall part NOT at the beginning of the season, but 2 months into it?
I mean, you lost 5 of your first 6, but that was only 6 games and you recovered from that, things got bad much later.
I'm not saying for sure they weren't out of shape, but I'm not 100% buying it...I think its more of an excuse to throw out there.
And another thing, why the heck am I up at 4:30 in the morning posting this?
-
4
-
1
-
3
-
-
43 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:
Well, Zuck may have just PO'd Terry and GM Howdy Doody with this quote. Maybe our thin-skinned owner and his favorite GM son will now trade Jason this offseason....since he dared to say something that doesn't match the company line (even though it is the absolute truth).
I'm not sure why that would get Pegula or Adams upset?
-
6 minutes ago, HumanSlinky39 said:
KA either doesn't believe in that philosophy or is too bought into his "palm trees & taxes" ***** that he doesn't think it can be done. Either way, that is a fireable offense. Get this errand boy out of here and get somebody in here with some balls that will aggressively attack the myriad weaknesses on this roster.
I still think the "palm trees and taxes" thing is code for "We don't want to spend that much money to attract guys".
If you are already good, or if you pay up, players will play where there is high taxes and no palm trees (See the Rangers the last few years before this year, or Winnipeg now, or the Bills for that matter"
-
39 minutes ago, pi2000 said:
I do. Sports for some of us is not always rooting for the playoffs. Some of us can have fun watching an individual game, rooting for an individual player we like to reach a milestone or to have some kind of achievement.
So to answer the question you asked, not everyone, but a lot of us do.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, jad1 said:
Stockholm syndrome.
Some people just watch sports for different reasons, and don't take it as seriously as others. It has nothing to do with the Stockholm syndrome. As a matter of fact, I would say that those who use that term as you have above are doing so to try not to be victims of it themselves. To those of us who view each game as entertainment, there isn't much more to it than that.
There are no REAL victims here...we all have the option to not go to games, to not buy the merchandise, to not watch the games on TV. But there are some people that actually do enjoy it because they don't take it too seriously.
-
5
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:
My nephew took his family. Their kids got bobbleheads, the daughter caught a t-shirt, and the saw the Sabres win, They love it. They don't know about any of the drama or baggage. They dress in Sabres gear and cheer their team.
A few of us have been saying this is kinda how we are 'getting' through the season....for me thinking of why I liked the games as a kid.
You want them to make the playoffs of course, and even as a kid I was watching the standing and thinking a bit about the playoffs. But, it was much, MUCH more entertainment on a nightly basis. There is a game tonight! I want to see goals! You might or might not be aware of the front office/coaching staff, but sometimes you weren't and if you were, you didn't care. The team won 36 games, that is 36 times you felt good at the end of the night. The last team to make the playoffs won 40 games. They got that 'winning feeling' less than 1 time per month more than you did. I don't think there is any fan that doesn't care at all about the playoffs...but there are some fans that just want to see hockey and 'hope' their team wins...nothing more.
-
1
-
1
-
-
So, now its the playoffs for Cozens, something he obviously never got here. He has a chance to show if he is a 'playoff' guy or not.
As far as the regular season, with 20 games with Ottawa...he basically was close to the same guy he was here.
With Ottawa:
-20 games, 4 goals, 9 assists, -4, 8.7% shooting (82 game pace: 16 goals, 37 assists, -16)
-His advanced stats slightly negative. 50 being equal: Corsi 44.0, Fenwick 44.8, Shots 46.7, Goals for/against 44.0, Scoring chances 41.6, High danger chances 43.8 Link here: https://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?fromseason=20242025&thruseason=20242025&stype=2&sit=5v5&score=all&stdoi=oi&rate=n&team=OTT&pos=C&loc=B&toi=0&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410&lines=single&draftteam=ALL
David Perron was Cozens linemate he spent the most time with since the trade (almost 180 minutes). Cozens brought Perrons analytics way down compared to before Cozens was there. With Cozens, Perrons Corsi went down almost 8 points, his fenwick down almost 8 points, shots for vs against down 5.5, scoring chances down 5.5, high danger chances even.
Again, its no mystery that I personally wanted Cozens gone. But, again, playoffs for him. A couple well timed goals and an upset over the Leafs and he may be viewed as a different player.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, pi2000 said:
I don't care what they do in the offseason unless they hire a POHO to call the shots instead of Terry.
Until that happens it will just be more of the same.
I don't think Pegula wants to give up any level of involvement, decision making, contact, etc with the team.
If, IF they hired a President of Hockey operations, I don't think Pegula does anything differently. I think it would just be one more person included with everyone else, between him and the on ice players. And by 'between' I don't mean it would distance him from anything. I think there is the "on ice product", then a "group of 6-8 guys" in the front office, and then Pegula. The only think would change would be that group/pool of 6-8 now becomes a group/pool of 7-9.
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
Movies / TV Shows - I Have Watched / Plan To Watch
in The Aud Club
Posted
With most of the Star wars stuff, Marvel stuff too, I watch almost all the movies and I give every single series/show 2-3 episodes to decide whether I want to watch the whole thing or not.
Andor just wasn't for me. I watched the very first episode, It really did nothing for me. We gave it 2 more, after 3 episodes I gave up. Nothing, just didn't draw me in at all. I guess it just shows why people have different tastes in entertainment.