mjd1001

What would the cap of these teams be? From Capwages.com:

Agree 100%. I think he is good enough and should be on the roster, but it was his production near the time of the team being selected. Also, best thing for a player like him is to get the time off. He's had like 5 or 6 injuries in the past 2 seasons.

Ideally, one of their first round prospects would play the type of game Greenway does....so if/when greenway gets injured, you have the young guy gradually have a chance to get integrated into the team when needed. Alas, the Sabres don't have any top prospects in Roch that are in the 6'5" tall, somewhat physical type game.

I guess I agree in principle. The way I look at it with guys that get injured a lot (Greenway, Samuelsson) is...lets say they give you 60-70% of the games in season. Those 30-40% of the games that they don't play, you are putting in a bottom-of-the-roster player to replace them. What if you got a guy that historically gives you 90%+ of the games? Even if he is a little worse, the 'average' of a Greenway giving you 70% of the games with a much worse player giving you 30%....that might be worse than a guy slightly worse than greenway, but MUCH better than the replacment player, giving you 90+%

I think there is an arrogance, not only among the NHL but among many content providers....that the viewers "will find us". The owners look at their product and think they are going to maximize revenue and if someone is fan..the fan will find them. What they don't get is looking at it from the fans point of view. Cable. TNT, ESPN. Streaming on ESPN+, sometimes Hulu. Network TV on the weekends (they still do that). Then add in the things we all deal with that don't have anyting to do with the NHL, we deal with other Cable networks, Netflix, Max, Peacock, and others. We may have subscriptons to other entertainment products that dont' even have to do with watching content. For many consumers, this is all WAY TOO MUCH. So what happens when we have too much in our lives to deal with? We focus on the top 2-3, maybe 4 things, and we forget about the rest. Is the NHL at the top of that list for most viewers? No way. I know Nascar isn't a big following for many fans, but they have been making the same mistakes. In the past, there was one, maybe 2 networks you could watch every race on, and most races started in the early afternoon.. The ratings have been going down for years, for a lot of reasons, but you want to watch Nascar this year? Well depending on the race of the year you may have to watch The CW....or Fox...or FS1....TNT...oh, now Amazon prime for some races....and even Max. REALLY? I LIKE nascar and I'm watching a lot less just because I don't want to figure all that out. If you are the NFL, you can probably push people to 'jump through a few hoops' to view your product. Even they are getting some pushback. The NHL? They need to make their product as EASY to find and view as possible. They aren't doing that.

I do not want to believe all of what you said...and I do not think it is 100% true. But I think its probably a much greater than 0% chance its true (maybe in the 30-60% range). And that is troubling enough. But hey, we might get hit by that asteroid in a few years so for many of is the fate of the team won't matter!

I voted for the first choice, they are my team. Every year I start out that way. When the team end up with a huge losing streak or falls out of the race...I temporarily fall down to catetory 2 (they are frustrating), but then usually a week or two later I accept the yearly fate and I'm back up to #1, accepting they will not make the playoffs but watching the games for nightly entertainment only.

I would think people that use the streaming apps....it would be easier to track them without having to use traditional methods. For example, If I am watching a Sabres game on MSG but doing so with the spectrum app....that should be a lot easier (if not automatic) to track just who is watching, how many pepole, for how long. But as you said, I'm not sure if those numbers are even being used when talking about 'tradional ratings'. I would think those numbers they would want to keep private and only use them in negotations with advertisers.

I think this speaks to a bigger issue....just how available are the games? A lot of the NHL owners are older, they have existing business partners and they are used to working with them. They want to keep on making money the same way, the way they know how, and that is mostly through traditional media deals. I read a survey once a couple years ago that I cannot find, but I'll reference what I read in it and say my anecdotal beleifs align with it: Younger audiences are less likely to pay to view an event or to pay for a TV package for an event, but they spend a greater percentage of their money on jerseys, food and drink when they do go to games, gambling...etc. So they key to making money off of younger audience is to KEEP THEM ENGAGED (give them your product really cheap or free to watch) and you'll make up the money from them on the other things. Put a moat around your product and make them pay a toll to be exposed to it, and you are likely to lose them entirely. In my personal family and group of friends, EVERY SINGLE person I know over 50 has a traditional cable TV package and very few of them have any streaming service (we tried to get my parents and inlaws to try Netflix and Hulu over the last few years, they watched a bit of it but then gave up and they go back to their old fashioned cable tv where they have the old fashioned cable box hooked up to their TV). On the other hand, almost everyone I know under 40 does not subscribe to cable TV at all (daughter and her fiancee, 2 nieces, 2 nephews). They are 100% streaming only and none of them watch the Sabres at all. My nephew, who is in his early 20s, was a huge fan of them, but since he moved out and got his own place....now nothing with him regarding the NHL. I talked to him over the holidays and he says he 'kinda' misses the Sabres, but he almost laughed at the prospect of getting a Cable TV package just to get MSG to watch the games. Its not even an option he would consider. It happend with me with Baseball. I grew up in Buffalo and as a little kid (well under 10 years old) I could watch the Blue Jays on local TV (CFTO or CTV? I forgot which one). But they they started going cable only. living at home with my parents, I picked up on watching the Braves (TBS) and Yankees, but lost track of the Blue Jays and totally stopped going to games in Toronto. Now with us having a limited cable package, I don't watch much baseball at all. I went from as a Kid watching evey baseball game I could, buying trading cards and sticker books, asking for a jersey for my birthday, playing ever MLB video game I could find, and begging to go to games in person in Toronto....to now being a person that hasn't watched a full 9 inning game in years and hasn't spent $1 on MLB in...maybe a decade? on MLB. And it started with how available the games were to watch on TV. Personally I hate gambling. I never gamble, I strongly dislike the ads for gambling, and I look down on it. HOWEVER, if the NHL made most of their games available for free....if they had a game free on streaming every single night, I would bet (no pun intended) that they could make a LOT of money on 18-35 year old guy hanging out with their friends at bars placing bets on NHL gams if they can watch them/check in on them live for free. The NFL is above all the other sports, but how did it get that way? You almost always knew when you could find a game on TV, and there were always games, especially the home team, that were on for free. Other leagues may not replicate the success of that, but that is where they should start with their product. The NHL owners don't want to give up those traditional sources of revenue though networks, but by doing so, they are losing some of the younger fan base. Yeah, there are a lot of younger fans when you watch games in cities like Boston and Columbus and Dallas in the stands, but they could have SO many more if they made their games more available. Its the old "The owners could get $10 now and $10 in the future, or they could take $5 now and a LOT more than $10 in the future...and they are electing for the $10 now over the prospect of more in the future"

Spectrum here, but not traditional cable. We dont' have a box, we use the app on our TV's and everything is done over wifi. That also allows us to have the really cheap (cheaper) package where we just get the basics and get to select 10 other channels (MSG, ESPN and TNG being among the choices). Not sure if you consider that 'cable' or not.

He's a good player, not great of course but good when he is playing. My issue is, does how good he is justify how much he is injured? It looks like there have been almost 20 different occasions in the past 4 seasons where he has missed time due to an injury: https://www.flashscore.com/player/greenway-jordan/EeTUHE6b/injury-history/ Getting injured happens. missing an average of 5-7 games per year due to injury is unfortunate, but when you have as many different injuries and miss as much time as he does, that is where it crosses the line to me to injury prone. Do you sign Greenway and pencil him in for a middle 6 role? Or would you rather have someone who (if you can find them) is a LITTLE bit less effective than Greenway but someone you think you can rely on for a lot more games? If you pick the 2nd, then you are likely making a decision to move on from Greenway. I was wrong about one thing, when Ruff came in, I thought Greenway would be one of the guys on the way out. I was wrong about that, not its just his injuries.

What days and times are the games on? Give me a routine, if you have games on 3 days of the week and they always start at a certain time, then I will know where to go for them. Now, if they have a set schedule already, I don't know what it is so hammer that home to viewers (after coming in from every break or in intermissions, remind viewers something like "Remember, you can watch the NHL on TNT EVERY (Tuesday, Thursday, whatever) and (7pm, 8pm, whatever). For years, I knew/know I can watch the NFL Sunday at 1pm. I know Sunday night baseball on ESPN. Let me know, without fail, the days and times I can rely every week on seeing an NHL game. I like watching out of town NHL games. If not directly, I will have them on the TV anyway while I do other things around the house. But I'm not going to search them out. I either KNOW when they are on...I randomly stumble upon them before stumble on something else...or I miss them and don't watch.

I know the reason why for no Russian team..the politics of it....but any tournament like this without Russia just seems lacking something major. Kaprizov (if he were available) is one I'd want to see in this tournament for sure, added to your list. And of course, Pastrnak, Necas, Draisaitl, Stutzle, Hischier, Roman Josi...and others. Having Russia in a tournament like this would make it so much more interesting. As for the rest of the world? I know a 'world' team doesn't really give the other players much to 'play' for as far as national pride...but how about a 'world' team where the uniforms are the same but they get to wear a crest or a log representing their home country?

I am pretty excited for this tournament, but a bit upset with the week it is played on. A problem I have that maybe other don't....one of the few other sports I follow is Nascar. Not a HUGE fan, but I used to live in Daytona so I love watching everything leading up to the Daytona 500 this week. -The first game of the tournament is at the EXACT time as Daytona Poll Qualifying on Wed -USA vs Finland on Thursday is the exact time the Daytona Duel races occur -2 games on Saturday going pretty much up against the Daytona Xfinity and Arca season openers So yeah, probably not a big deal for most, but it kinda screws up my optimal viewing schedule (Not to even mention Valentines day weekend where my wife wants to spend some time with me, and possibly going to see a movie sometime this weekend also)

This is anecdotal, so take it for how you will... About a month or two ago I was home bored and we were discussing the Power play and how to make it better. On a Saturday night, I went to NHL's web site and watched the replay of every powerplay goal for that day and night. There had to be close to 15 that I saw. The point I was making was that most of a teams PP success is not by pure skill or coaching, its by doing the basics, because most goals were not people picking corners, rather scrums in front of the net and deflections. If I had to guess most were deflections. Which gets me to my point. A lot of goals, in that one night at least, a LOT more than I thought....were goals that were scored not by beating a goalie cleanly, but by a deflection, often times going off the defensive player. Its not the injuries I am worried about. I think I would most of the time rather have my players stay on their skates so they can recover quickly, but more importantly don't screen your own goalie and for sure, don't allow for deflections that will be the cause of goalies allowing goals.

At this point I don't care who is calling the shots so much as will they make the required changes. -If Adams doesn't make any moves at all, then he can be gone for all I care. -If Adams makes a somewhat meaning trade before the deadline, and is instrumental in getting Cozens moved to wing or traded, he can stay, and is willing to spend some more money to make the team better, he can stay. -If Lindy finds a way to get Quinn going and is fine with moving Cozens to wing, fine, he can stay. -If Pegula opens up the wallet and gets this team to spend close to the cap next year, fine. I am OK generally with 'inactivity' while young guys are developing. But we are past that time now. Make the moves. I will not indict a coach, owner, or a GM for making moves unless they are all utter disasters. I don't think that is the case with this group. Where my patience runs thin, or in this case is almost running out is when you gave things a lot of time and you aren't doing well, so make some moves. That means trades, moving people to other positions, signings. Since December, we have been at the point where changes have to be made. The failure of this owner, this coach, this GM will only be if they choose to continue to sit on the hands. I know I am repeating myself, but Pegula, open up the Wallet. Adams, make some moves. Ruff, If Cozens is still here keep him at Wing. There is a lot of low hanging fruit out there to make this team better, each of them has had an opportunity to do some of it, why hasn't it happened yet?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but just throwing this out there.... ARE those guys the top Defensive defensemen in terms of helping their teams prevent goals? Or is it just thought they are because they are at least decent-to-good defensively, and the fact that they block a lot of shots adds to the perception they are better than they are because many people DO beleive blocking shots is a good thing? The 2nd question is...if we do agree blocking shots is a good thing....then how are blocked shots credited? Is it good if a guy slides on the ice (Jay McKee style) to get the blocked shot? Or are some of the current blocked shots leaders more guys that are good at the subtle art of getting in the way of shots, taking them off of their legs or shins? To me....blocked shots....its far too generic. There is a BIG difference in real application between a guy who goes down off of his skates and one that just approaches a shooter at the point and stays upright to take it off the shinpads. In an ideal statistical record keeping world, it would be great to see blocked shots broken down by the type of blocked shot.

I didn't see it. I was just reacting to other people who said it was. Even on the radio yesterday morning on 590 out of Toronto they said Drake had a bad day because of the halftime performance even though he wasn't in it. Again, I try to avoid talk about stuff like this, but everywhere I turned yesterday, I couldn't get away from it even though I didn't even watch the Superbowl.

I lived in Boston in the last 1990's and early 2000s. I wasn't a Red Sox fan, but the angst they had was, like nothing I have ever seen. Funny thing, once they won the World Series, a lot of the people I worked with had a lot less interest in the team after that. I mean, sure they were fans, but my entire work career with them in the late 90's and early 2000's, it was Red Sox all the time, non stop, everyday talking about them. Once they won a world series...it was quite a step down. Its like their 'fandom' went from something of an obsession to just something normal. I would think after you won 1 or 2 titles behaving like you mentioned, it just wouldn't happen as much.

I have never seen anything quantify it in any way. I think its something that is sometimes good, sometimes bad. "old time' hockey guys liked it. Toughness, sacrificing your body...etc. But in reality, if you are leaving your skates, all that may do is cause you to put yourself out of the rest of the play and take longer to get back in. Also, if you are intentionally trying to block shots, you can tend to put yourself in front of your own goalie and screen him, or worse yet, cause a deflection. I forgot who it was but sometime in the last decade I could swear there was a commentator that was a former goalie (maybe Lundquist?) that said he didn't want his D-man blocking the shots..just get out of the way and let him see the shot and he'll make the save. From a very wide view, stats on blocked shots don't seem to point to players or teams that do it well being any better, or worse than players or teams that don't. The 3 teams with the most blocked shots this year? Philly, Anaheim, and San Jose. The teams with the least? Carolina, Florida, Edmonth. The players with the most blocked shots this year? Ian Cole, Chris Tanev, Jacob Trouba, and Nick Seeler. Ok, whatever. Not a who's who of guys I want on my team for sure.

Per my above post: https://www.naturalstattrick.com/game.php?season=20242025&game=20885 I know I did see Cozens play a bit on the wing. I'm just not sure if he was supposed to be at center and just went to the boards, or if Krebs was the actual center. Naturalstattrick shows him listed on their line tool as playing wing with Krebs and Quinn last game. Its only one game, but the advanced stats of that line were really, REALLY good, with Cozens showing at wing (and with it appearing Krebs and him did split center/wing duty)

Yeah, I know what you mean. I'll keep this short. I posted a longer version of this in another thread, but the short version: If they move and play Cozens at wing, I'll be happy. In fact, I'll be somewhat upset if they move him to wing and then trade him shortly after. If Lindy held a press conference today and said Cozens is moving to wing for the rest of the season, I might have the first post on this board saying they better not trade him now. I want to like him. I see some of what he is good at. I guess my arguing with you and others about him is with me simply accepting (right or wrong) they they are going to play him only at center, so I view him not as a hockey player, but as a center only. Last game at center there was a lot of line juggling, but Cozens did play some wing on a line with Krebs and Quinn. I'm not sure what percentage of the time he was on wing vs center with Krebs (they kinda switched off) but he did play SOME wing and their Corsi, Fenwich, and expected goals for/against were WAY in positive territory. I think he can still succeed here, but not with this organization trying to hammer the 'square peg' that he is through the 'round hole' that the center position is.

The one thing about Cozen is, his 'advanced numbers' in one way are usually pretty good. Expected goals for, as he DOES get to and goes to the slot and those high danger areas. If there is one part of his game I think is good that is it, he is not afraid to skate in front of the net or the slot. Now the issue is, first, his accuracy from there and 2nd, he seems to always shoot once he gets there and doesn't look to pass at all (makes his advanced stats look better but not his actual production). My issue with him has always been 2 things: 1.) expectations....30+ goal scorer every year he is not. If we accept him as a 20 goal scorer, with the upside/ceiling (but not expectations) of getting 30, then he's good there. and 2.) Him being at Center. His weakness may be a strength at wing. Him wanting to chase the puck, him wanting to go to the boards. Him wanting to engage opposing players instead of just playing his 'zone'. All of those things are weaknesses for someone who is 'patrolling' the center of the ice, but strengths for a winger. When he forchecks, he likes to go deep and take guys to the boards or go ALL the way into the corner and finish checks....again, a GOOD thing for a winger, but my center needs to be more aware of everyone around him. I'm not pretending to know more about hockey then Ruff, Granato, the scouting department, and all the assistants. There must be SOMETHING going on that we don't know or don't see. Its just that everytime I see him make a mistake, or be out of position, almost everytime, I think to myself, "If he was on wing, that wouldn't be so bad" or "that is exactly what I WANT my wingers to do and NOT want the center to do, and look how it hurt him." I don't get it. I say over and over Cozens is an awful player, who hurts this team. I think most of the time that is true. But he STILL can be an asset, IMO. They need to play him where his strengths are. They haven't done that with him for almost his entire time here.

I was replying to someone who replied to me...who I replied to...etc etc. Beating a dead horse is mostly what this message board is about, the team doesn't give us much new to talk about.

I know a lot of people were/are excited for the numbers Rosen is putting up in Rochester, but I don't see him as a guy that will have a role on the Sabres team putting up points. I think his role is a 3rd or 4th liner (hopefully 3rd) who can put up 15, MAYBE 20 goals for you, but will play a VERY responsible defensive game. His style may be different, but I think of his utility as a Johan Hecht type player eventually.