mjd1001

All of that is my main problem with Cozens. Again, I don't know just how complex of a 'system' the Sabres play. But I'll watch, and I see players looking around. I might see Tuch go in deep to forcheck and Tage then drops back to the blue line to cover any exit. One D-man will go into the corner to chase a puck, so the opposing one will 'shade' more to the center to cover anyone else coming into the zone. When I see things like that, its kinda basic stuff, but it makes me think these guys practice positioniong. Then I watch Cozens....BLAAAHHHHH...blows all of that stuff up. Will chase the puck no matter where it goes, leaves coverage on a guy making him wide open to try to chase a loose puck 20 feet away. Takes shots on goalies where the goalie sees it coming and is set and waiting while his winger is wide open. Cozens is the definition of pond hockey and it has to be infuriating to be one of his linemates IF you are doing the right thing and have to keep covering for him.

The team's play mean that in one particular period of time they did not play well. The team itself, you are saying its not their play 'for one period', but rather as a player the are embarassing. Personally...I would much rather have my boss tell me "your presentation on Tuesday was embarassing" rather than tell me "as an employee, you are embarassing".

I don't know for sure, but I just 'assume' it is. The trap, we heard of the 'left wing lock', plays that are set up off of faceoffs where a guy may be assigned to 'pick' an opposing player. Maybe having one winger forcheck deep into the zone and depending on what side the opposing team exits the zone with the puck, the remaining forwards 'rotating' to cover for the winger who is in deep. When Short handed, do you strictly maintain the PK 'box', or does one guy pressure the puck carrier...and if so is that based on pre-scouting that tells you what players on the other team are more suceptible to pressure and which ones are not...and then if you DO push a guy with the puck how do the remaining players 'rotate' to fill zones? Even when, how often, and where to go during and after line changes? I don't know, I am guessing and would HOPE that some advanced scouting goes into playing other oppoents, and that player are told to not play 'pond hockey' and just chase the puck but to play zones on the ice depending on what their linemates are doing. Please do not tell me they had that trade with Detroit worked out to ship out Cozens, and then pulled it back because they thought they 'needed' cozens because tage can't take faceoffs!

Speaking on Friday's episode of the "32 Thoughts" podcast, Friedman confirmed that the Sabres and Red Wings were deep in discussions leading up to the NHL’s holiday trade freeze in December. “There’s definitely not a lot that gets out of Detroit, and there’s not very much that gets out of Buffalo,” Friedman said. “But finally, it got coughed up to me that they believe the Red Wings were looking at Cozens. And it fits. ”I think there’s a lot of people looking at Cozens. And I will say this, there was a time that a couple people said to me they thought it was close.” NHL insider Chris Johnston noted on Dec. 17 that Buffalo could be hesitant to move young players with upside after some of their recent moves backfired. full article: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nhl/red-wings-trade-for-sabres-dylan-cozens-was-close-before-roster-freeze/ar-BB1rhJw9?ocid=BingNewsSerp

If that is the exact quote, it appears he called their 'play' in the 2nd period embarassing, he didn't say the team, as in the players that constitute it, embarassing. The title of thread led me to beleieve the latter, it is more of the former. There is a big difference to me in saying "the team is embarassing" rather than "the team's play in the 2nd period was embarassing".

It is no secret how much I dislike Cozens. So I would start by removing him from the lineup....trade, long term benching...whatever. See how that goes first. I really REALLY think he hurts this team so much the team is better if he doesn't play. After you get a couple weeks without Cozens, if things aren't better go onto the next thing. But you have to start someplace. You have to make a first move before you make a 2nd. Lets get that first move, if other teams are calling about Cozens according to rumors, lets go! Maybe I have a blind eye for other problems on this team. I really REALLY like Thompson and he probably has more 'off' games than I care to admit. But I do not see Thompson and Tuch actively hurting the team like I do Cozens. And as far as 'under pressure', there are not the stats that tell the whole story, but consider this over the past 3.5 seasons: Game winning goals: Tuch 17 (in 40 less games than Cozens), Thompson 15, Cozens 4 Powerplay goals: Thompson 43, Tuch 12 (in 40 less games than Cozens), Cozens 10 Cozens is the single worst forward I have every seen without the puck, and he scores a powerplay goal 1 out of every 28 games, and he scores a game winner 1 out of ever 70 games.

It is so obvious. Lindy HAS to see it. The guys that break down film HAVE to see it. Adams played hockey, he actually was a pretty good defensive forward, he HAS to see it. Cozens taking himself out of the play or leaving his spot on the ice wide open happens so often, it can't be ignored by the coaches and staff. As bad as they are, this is simple stuff anyone can see. This is a guess, but there is nothing else that makes sense. The ONLY reason I can see he keeps getting ice time, doesn't get benched, and hasn't been moved and traded to ANY team that wants to take a chance on him..it has to be Pegula. He has to be one of "Pegula's favorites" Nothing else makes sense. He's bad, but the coach can't bench him, the GM can't trade him, because he might be the owner's favorite. We are fans. We all have had our 'favorite players' that weren't good but we didn't want to admit it. We have their jersey, we 'called' them as a great pick when they were drafted. Fans often have blinders on when it comes to evaluating their favorite player. My fear is Cozens is Terry's favorite in this way.

If I feel up to it, I'll look at the replays again and check more on Gilbert. I usually just look at 2 angles on the replay, then the goal visualizer...go forward and back a bit on the replay. Sometimes I miss things. I just looked at it again, Yeah, bad play by Gilbert. But Cozens play still drives me nuts and I think if Cozens didn't show up in the corner the goal does't get scored. I just think Cozens shouldn't have even been there. Him being there caused a chain reaction of things that led to the goal. Cozens goes in deep when Gilbert was already there...so Zucker has to go cover the slot, leaving his side open. No one was there to cover Evans who scored, because that was Zuckers guy/area. Maybe Gilbert would have lost the puck and he did not control it well, but the goal was scored because Cozens went too deep, into a CORNER where if any help is needed it shoudl be a winger.

He may work hard. I only see him 'glide' every once in a while...he puts the effort in. Hes' just BAD with decision making. Not "makes a mistake" every once a while. Nope, just bad. Whatever players you put on a line with him almost instantly become worse...when they leave his line they get better.

Only if his new team can change his entire mental approach to hockey. I don't see that happening...and even if it did....good for them. He needs to be OFF of this team. I know I am repeating myself, but he HURTS the team, he sinks his linemates. He is black hole of bad play out there that gets anyone on the ice with him stuck inside of it.

I thought Dahlin played well. TNT, so-so. Bryram had is worst game in the past 2 weeks. Zucker wasn't awful, but he was out of position more than usual. Cozens pretty bad. I think some of Zucker looking out of position may have been on the fact he was covering for Cozens, who positionally, was as bad as any game I have seen from him in a month (back to his old ways). I'm sorry for those who like him, but Cozens just doesn't make mistakes, he makes mistakes that cause his line-mates to be out of position and look bad. If he has ANY value at all, he needs to go. Is it any surprise that TNT and Zucker were such big 'minus' players this game, more than they have been the rest of the year...when playing with Cozens? Cozens poisons whatever players you put on a line with him. Its game after game with him (at least 75% of games played) where he goes in too deep with no chance of getting the puck, he goes into a coner to 'help' a d-man leaving his spot wide open. He goes in deep in the offensive zone into a corner when his winger is already there, leading to odd man rushes against. He's bad, really really bad. Just because of the negative plays, it is no longer an exaggeration, I really REALLY think this team is better with McLeod and Krebs at 2c and 3c and removing Cozens totally. Cozens has more upside scoring, but the negatives are just WAY too much.

This team has the forwards out of position frequently. Guys chase the puck without regard for where their line-mates are. They 'go rogue' on the PK and leave spots open. They (mostly the centers) frequenly go in too deep in the offensive zone when the wingers are already on the boards, allowing odd man rushes against. I see this almost every game. I do not see the Sabres getting as many opportunities by taking advantage of the other team doing it. Meaning the Sabres do it way too much. You would think its a coaching issue, right? Yet they are doing it under Ruff, they did it under Granato, they did it Under Krueger. Some different players, but they did it under Housley. Its the players, a lot of this stuff is simple stuff. You can bring in another coach but if the players just do what they want (It APPEARS that is what is happening), nothing will change. This team needs a heart transplant (or 'core' transplant, if you will). Decide if you want to keep Power or Bryson, and trade the other for the best offer. Cozens, after 2 good weeks of play, is back to his old/bad habits the past few games again (all the things I listed above). Make those 2 moves, maybe another one or 2 and get in a legit 2nd line. Unfortunately Clifton doesn't have a TON of talent, but he plays hard and doesn't get out of position often. This team needs more Cliftons and I guess Zuckers, and less players like Cozens.

Pegula probably haven't found his yes man to replace him yet.

Benson, Krebs, Peterka, and Dahlin (despite the -2) I thought played a good game. Cozens, Zucker (at least compared to what we are used to), and Gilbert (in his limited ice time), not so good. Tage wasn't BAD but he wasn't as good as he needs to be.

I don't care to watch the game live at this point, so I just looked at the replays of the goals allowed. My observations/opinions: 1st goal: Cozens (mostly) on this one, and a good example of why he should not be playing center. He chases the puck, and causes the rest of the guys to rotate out of positon to cover for him. Sabres just did a line change so I'm not sure who was supposed to be where. But basicaly, the entire center of the ice was left wide open, along with the near side of the ice, where the goal was scored from. First of All Cozens. Gilbert is in the corner with the Seattle guy, yet Cozens goes full speed into the corner to battle for the puck when Gilbert was already there. Center of the ice? wide open. I assume Zucker was supposed to be on the near side. He takes the slot to cover for Cozens, now no-one is there covering for him, and the goal is scored from there. Cozens can't go full speed deep into the corner and stay there if he is playing center, if the puck is on the boards, he has to allow the far side winger to help out the D-man. 2nd goal: Bryam here. Three guys were in the near corner for the Sabres, the puck headed toward the blue line (not guaranteed to go out) and all three guys started to head up to the blue line to exit the zone. There was no guarantee the puck was going out of the zone, and the Seattle player (goal scorer) was left behind by all of them. Byram was more concerned with breaking out of the zone instead of actually staying back on his side of the ice and left a player totally uncovered. 3rd goal: Keyston cops goal. Not really bad positioning by anyone, just the puck goes over the stick of a few guys and then goes in of off of Bryson. 4th goal: UPL to me here, and a bit of all the forwards, Cozens again and Zucker and Tage. Now I know the forwards may be pressing being down a goal, but when the puck exits the zone, ALL THREE forwards are behind Seattle goal line and ALL THREE in the same corner. I think it was Tage's corner so I can understand him going deep, but either Cozens or Zucker has to back off so they all aren't in the same spot. As for UPL... First of all, doesn't look like its screened, UPL is set and its from an off angle. THIS is an example of I want my goalie to make that save. The Cozens part, and why he should not be a Center. 3 on 2, both Zucker and Cozens are the 3rd defender trailing, If you have the replay, watch it. Zucker hustles back, but can't make it. From almost center ice all the way back, Cozens just glides. Had Cozens been hustling back, maybe Zucker could have gone to the wing and possible disturb the shooter. 5th goal. A bit on all the guys on the ice defending. PP goal, the Sabres weren't set, as simple as that. The goal scorer was alone in front of the net, Probably Gilbert's guy, basic mistake instead of slowing a bit and going in FRONT of the net on his way back to cover the guy, he skating in too deep and had to carry speed behind the net. Once he had to circle behind the net, that extra 1-2 seconds allowed his guy to be wide open. Maybe a BIT on the forwards. Besides Gilbert, all three other guys were on the near side. When you have 3 of your 4 PP guys on the same side of the ice, that leaves a LOT of open space on the other 2/3 of the ice. I know the instinct is to go get the puck, but the best way to defend the PP is to have one, MAYBE 2 guys go toward the puck, and the other 2 or 3 guys need to maintain their position.

I really don't mind the broadcast team. My biggest issue with them is when I'm out and listening on the radio, they often go minutes and minutes without saying the score. But then again, so did RJ. I don't think they are anything special, but I also don't really have a problem.

That was a scoring chance against that. Shouldn't have happened. Don't know if Dahlin just got beat, or if having Gilbert out there He was trying to communicate with him and there was a mix-up

"Trying hard enough" to win I'll agree with you on. Its like he made one push with tank to be good, when that didn't work, add to his ownerhsip of the Bills, and it turned into "sole reason for existence is to win the cup" and went to "how can I try to make this work on a budget"

At the beginning of Pegula's Reign, they were trying to win, so that is the starting point. I was simply bringing it up to say at any given point, what are the statistical odds. Even if some teams are 'better than others so they have a better chance, well, that is the whole point of this. The Sabres are and have not been one of those better teams. So the argument that other teams have better odds because they are better, isn't that the point of just how bad the pure numbers are....because other than the tank years, the sabres were trying to win. Oh, and the "tank" that they went through, that was their attempt to, a few years later (and during the statistical streak), in their minds GUARANTEE they would be making the playoff every year. Take a long enough sample size, and the numbers and circumstances statistically even out. Basically, if you remove the years they 'weren't trying' from the equation, that should actually swing things back in the other direction and even the numbers out a few years later when they are 'enjoying' the benefits of what you got for not trying. Also, I think to say they weren't trying to win most years isn't accurate. 2 years leading up to the McDavid draft yeah, that qualifies. But even the years they drafted Dahlin and Power, I don't think they were full-on 'tank' years. It was just they were bad. And finally, almost every year, there are teams 'not trying to win'. So on the years the Sabres ARE trying to win, there are other teams 'not trying', so that should increase their odds even more in those years. I think it all washes out and the numbers still hold somewhat close to being true. Remember, this is 'Hockey heaven' The reason this franchise exists is to not only make the playoffs but to win the cup.

I like to post this, usually at this point ever year. With regard to your above bolded comment, this seems to be time for this season's version. I posted the math much more in depth in a previous post, but here goes the summary: Statistically, you can say you have a 50% chance of making or missing the playoffs in a given year. For any time, after 2 years, the 'odds' are 25% you miss both years, 25% you make it both years, and 50% chance you miss one year and make it the next...and so on and so on. Now, with expansion, the odds change slightly. It hasn't always been EXACTLY 50%, sometime you had a BETTER chance (beginning of the drought, 8 of 15 teams in the conference made the playoffs, so your odds to make it were even better than they are now. (Not to mention I didn't even add in the Covid year, where the odds increased, so the numbers below actually should be a tad worse) So, what are the pure statistical odds that any hockey team would take a 12 year period and not make the playoffs even once? 0.018% chance. Or, in other words, a 1 in 5,531 chance that, over the last 12 years, any team in the Sabres division/conference would not make the playoffs even ONE single time. If you 'simulated' an average team through 12 seasons, 5,531 times, only ONE of those times, on average, would a team miss 12 years in a row. Missing for 13 years in a row, with half the conference making the playoffs again, the odds of missing 13 years in a row would be 1 in 11,062. Chances of missing 14 years in a row? 1 in about 22,000. Or 0.0045% If you could find a sportsbook to give you odds that ANY team, starting today, would miss the playoffs for the next 14 years.....you would likely win about $2 million dollars on a $100 bet. No team in NHL history has ever had a longer playoff drought, not even close (no one else ever made more than 8 seasons). And they have done that over that time period with no cap troubles. With 20 first round draft picks. 10 of those being top 10 overall. 2 2nd overall and 2 first overall. We aren't talking about not making, or winning the cup with all those assets. Not even MAKING THE PLAYOFFS with all those assets is just...mind blowing.

Not only 'capable' of 100 points but he has done it already. 40 goals and 100 points while being a +16 (technically 39 goals but he missed a couple of games) The question is WHY has his game changed since he signed that contract? He signed that deal last spring. The season before he signed it: 39g, 63 assists, 102 points Last year before he signed: 63 games played, 29g, 46 assists (82 game pace of 38 goals, 60 assists, 98 points) SINCE signing his new deal (including playoffs): 67 games played 16goals 32assists (82 game pace of 20 goals, 39 assists, 59 points)

I know this thread isn't just about Cozens, but the question I cannot solve is...What IS the concept of Cozens? What makes him so valuable that we think he contributes to this teams long term success? I see a player who might have the worst hockey IQ/situational awareness on the team. Someone who hurts your defense by making bad decisions all the time. Someone who is average at best (maybe below average) with making his wingers better (he has little sense of when to pass vs shoot). I see a guy who is a streaky shooter, but by streaky that ceiling is at most 30-35 goals per year, but the floor is 15 goals per yet. He also drags your powerplay into an abyss every time he is out there. I know I'm repeating my Cozens bashing from many threads before, but I see a guy that LONG TERM is going to be below average defensively, below average setting up his wingers, and will average 20-22 goals per year (some years in the teens, maybe some years close to 30). He's almost 24 and in his 5th year, so the excuse of "he's young, give him time" is quickly running out. So again, I'm not taking shots at him for the sake of it, but just what is the concept of Cozens that people don't want to let go of?

What would most people say if I told you in the next 2 weeks, The Sabres had to play At Florida, At Tampa, At Vegas, At Colorado, home to Vancouver, and then At Washington. All in less than a 2 week period? Oh, and the Colorado and Tampa games were on the 2nd night of back to backs where you are the traveling team. It might be challenging to find a harder 2 week stretch to play. Well, Montreal just played all those teams over 2 weeks. They beat every single one of them. (Funny the only other game they played was a loss to Chicago)

That proposal is tough. It depends on what the 'high end prospect' is. I personally do not value Cozens much at all. I think his ceiling as a player is alot lower than many others on this board value him at. Quinn though? I still don't know what his ceiling is. So, I probably wouldn't make that trade. I DO think that trade makes the Sabres better right NOW though. Its just for that package, I would rather trade Cozens alone (for a lesser return but see what you can get) while keeping Quinn and the prospect, or see what else I could get for Quinn and that prospect. To me, its not just a matter of "is this package worth it for the return?" yes or no. Its "what else might I be able to get for that package" as the deadline approaches. I don't know, and I do doubt there will be any one player better than Pettersson available this year for trade. Its just what is Pettersson worth attached to that $11m deal?

I'm just surprised Montreal SEEMS to have turned things around so quickly. Most 'experts', media, even myself thought there rebuild was 1-2 years behind Ottawa and Buffalo (and Detroit, but I never really liked Detroit's rebuild myself). About a month into the season the Canadians were 4-11. They had just lost 6 in a row by a combined score of 29-12. The team they played next that was a turning point in their season so far? Buffalo. They beat the Sabres, put up 7 goals, only allowed 18 shots...and from that night they have gone 16-9-1 (playing at a 100+ point pace for over 2 months now) If you dig a bit deeper, the Sabres really are the "get yourself right against" team, at least for Montreal. Even in the last 2 months where they were playing better, they hit another mini-slump. In early December, they had lost 3 of 4, allowing 19 goals in 4 games. Next up? Buffalo. That is the game they blew out the Sabres, 6-1, and since that night Montreal has been 11-2.