mjd1001

It is not a fact for EVERY situation. How can you say something is a fact, just because you want it to be? I have personally found that when I evaluate a player on a team, when using plus-minus with a little 'common sense eye test', it works better than the expected goals that people throw out on this forum. But hey, I guess the definition of what a 'fact' is has to run through you now? Um..nope.

I guess we disagree on that one. When comparing players on the same team, I think expected goals is much worse. They are different stats, they measure different things. But just as plus-minus can get something totally wrong, so can expected goals. A few times over the past few years expected goals was used to say how bad of a game Bryam had or how good of a game Cozens had, and It was obvious to many of us on this board it was way off base.

That is my problem with the xGF% and related stats. It measures where the shots are taken from if I am correct, but are the 'good shots'? I shot that you have time to set up for, maybe there is a screen in front of the net but is from a typical 'bad' area will be rated higher than a shot that is taken from a supposed better area but has no screen or is rushed. Also, as others have said, it doesn't measure a particular players shooting percentage. Tage is, has been, and will always likely be a much better shooter than Cozens, yet some of the advanced stats will not show that. So it takes me back to plus-minus. Yeah, there are flaws and exceptions with it. But on this forum goals expected and other advanced stats that are similar are used often as the end-all-to-be-all to judge a player, and they can be just as flawed as plus-minus. At least plus-minus measures something that actually HAS happened, not something that could happen. If there was only a single stat that somehow incorporated plus-minus, weight that plus-minus with relation to where you were on the ice, and merge that with expected goals for AND shooting percentage.

That is what a message board is for, talking about things and if more than 1 person wants to keep talking about it, than it is a converstation. If we discussed something in the past, should it be off limits to ever talk about it again? Who are you to decide if its a 'failure' because others want to talk about something that YOU PERSONALLY don't want to or need to hear? Geez.

He made Pegula feel comfortable. He wouldn't talk back to Pegula. He wouldn't say "no" to Pegula. Basically, its not that Pegula "Trusted" him....its more that Pegula "Trusted adams to do what Terry wants".

Ok, I'll start out with saying its not perfect. Its had to compare plus-minus of a player from one team to another. It is not a perfect stat. But, it is what it is. It is a measure (not counting special teams) that shows how many goals for you were on the ice for vs how many goals against you were on the ice for. Its useful in some, maybe many ways. It doesn't tell the whole story, but it can be a starting point to look at certain players and ask "why"? With that said, look at the Sabres currently. Who are the best plus-minus players on the team? Tuch +11, Bryam +7, McLeod +6, Thompson +4, Dahlin +4, Zucker +3, Greenway +3. Who are the worst? Quinn -11, Peterka -5, Bryson -4, Cozens -4. The positive guys are ones who produce offensively AND are not a consistent source of awful defensive plays. The negative guys (Quinn, Cozens, and Bryson to a lesser extent) are guys who play either a defensively unaware game, or at worst a selfish game. I guess my point is if I looked at the team play BEFORE looking at the stats, who helps the team the most without hurting it? I'd put Thompson, Dahlin and Tuch at the top of the list (maybe greenway before he got hurt). And if I said, who is constantly hurting the team, who makes plays that ACTIVELY makes this team worse? I'd put Quinn and Cozens up there. So, plus-minus is not perfect, but to me it tells more of a picture than many people who have discarded it as a state say.

I posted this elsewhere in much more detail, but in response and affirmation of what you said, look at the replay of the first goal allowed. Kulich played in the defensive end like a veteran (or at least how you would think a coach would want you to). It was Quinn that messed up. If you follow the puck around the 2 D-men (Clifton and I forgot who else) did what they should. They covered the front of the net and when the puck went to the boards, Clifton went to the boards to engage. Malenstyn or Mcleod (one of the new guys with an "M") had the high slot covered shading toward the goalies left. The Sabres didn't have the puck, but they were in position. As soon as the puck goes to the boards and Clifton gets near it, Quinn shoots out of the ice and leaves the D-zone. Not only was the puck not out of the zone yet, Clifton got his stick on it but certainly didn't have full control, and the biggest issue is, Quinn was the ONLY one covering the area where McKinnon was. Once Quinn left the defensive zone, there was NO coverage on McKinnon and the puck was on that side of the ice. What happened? The puck went to McKinnon, he carried it for a second or two pretty much uncontested, took the shot and beat UPL for the first Colorado goal. Maybe you are attempting to be aggressive and make the game 5-0....but even if you are playing aggressive, how are you the ONLY one near Nate McKinnon in your own zone, and you leave him in that zone, take yourself out of the play, when the puck is contested on the boards and McKinnon is only about 5-6 feet away from it? Kulich was on the ice and played his position (rather well to my eyes). Quinn did not. One of the most dangerous players in the LEAGUE is on the ice and you are the closest one to him. To leave him to try to get a scoring chance for yourself, that is lacking situational awareness at the minimum, bordering on just being selfish. Quinn for sure was channeling his inner "Cozens" on that one. Quinn had I think was his lowest ice time of the year. I hope its because Lindy saw that play and stapled him to the bench for most of the rest of the game.

I have very little ability to know exactly what certain D-men are 'assigned' to do in the modern NHL, so it is hard to evaluate them, especially outside of the top 2-3 on your team. With that said, I didn't have much of a problem with Johnson's game last year. If we look at him as having a ceiling at most as a 2nd pair guy, then I'm not looking at how many goals he scores or can he QB the PP. Instead, does he not make mistakes and is he at least competent in most aspects of the game. For those 2 thing when we watched him last year, I think he was fine in those areas. Look, He's not going to replace Dahlin, but eventually, does he/can he make guys like Jokiharju and/or Samuelsson expendable or at least not needed as much? My hope is yes. If you are moving on from Jokiharju, lets see if Johnson can take that role and perform just as well for less money, and as he gets experience maybe gets the same money but is a bit better/more reliable.

There is another issue related to the above that I don't think is addressed enough. Getting the games off of a cable-only TV package and/or making them easier and cheaper to watch. I will speak of 5 people I know all between the age of 20-30. 2 nieces that I used to watch hockey games with when they were younger baby-sittting them, our daughter, her boyfriends, and a 2nd cousin. None of them are now Sabres fans, and all used to be at least to a small extent. Why? They do not have cable. They only have streaming, and they are not going to get a cable package. The problem is, when people can't SEE your product, they grow away from your product. They do not buy merchandise, They do not go to games...if they lose exposure to your product, they withdraw from it and stop caring. Most of them are still Bills fans. Our daughter's boyfriend goes to his parents house to watch the Bills game every week (its only 15-20 times per year and usually on a weekend, much easier than the Sabres). My 2nd cousin watches every Bills game via an antenna. I think my two nieces do a combination of both. I know this isn't the case with everyone. But for a lot of younger people who are new to being out on their own, an expensive cable package or a buggy, glitchy, expensive, streaming service that can't even keep the same name for a few years...that isn't a solution.

I'm fine with having him around or insurance, but please lets not get him on the field in place of Hamlin or anyone else currently healthy. The last couple of seaons, it was already obvious Hyde and Poyer lost so much quickness and speed they were liabilities out there. Even if Hamlin doesn't read the offense/plays as well, his edge in athleticism over 'another year older' hyde more than makes up for that to me.

Good. Lafferty isn't playing much. He isn't playing well. He is not a key member or the Roster. But he has been in some locker rooms a lot better than the Sabres...at least he's seen more success. It may not mean much, but I'll be happy to see some players voicing, or showing some signs like this.

Cozens very first shift of the very first preseason game this year everyone on the ice was in position but he was running around all over the ice, was out of position....and the Sabres allowed a goal that was 100% on him. I remember because I posted about it...and I was called out a bit by people telling me basically to settle down, its preseason. Fair enough. Since then nothing has changed. Now I obviously have never coached in the NHL or been in a NHL level film room...I would have no idea just how in depth the coaching and strategy is there. But with my participation in lower level hockey, I think I know the basics. Since that preseason game, I had posted screenshots and diagrams on just how bad he is. He does bad things that no-one else on the roster does and its obvious and it hurts the team. Its gotten to the point that I don't often post it anymore...not because he doesn't do it, but it happens so much its a lot of work and I don't think there are many people left on this forum....that actually still THINK he is a good 2 way player. Right now hes not a good on way player, as you said he is a total liability on the ice in almost every aspect. I bring this up a lot, but the most baffling thing about this team is HOW does he keep getting ice time? How does he get all the offensive zone starts? How he is aloud to play outside of the system that everyone else on the team seems to play and when Cozens deviates from it..it is so obvious and it causes problems for the whole team? How does he still lead ALL FORWARDS on this team in Power play ice time, when he is shooting about 7% this year and has a total of TWO powerplay goals last year and ONE this year? Its not like he is setting up anyone on the PP, He has one PP assist only also. Does Terry think of Cozens so fondly like a long lost son? Is Adams showcasing him so much to the detriment of the team? Does Ruff look at the raw skill (with no execution) and think he will be the coach to 'get through to him' so he has patience with him? Has Cozens family blackmailed the entire front office? I have zero clue how he keeps getting his ice time. And yeah, He must be rubbing off on Quinn. Next to Cozens, I think Quinn is the forward now on the team making the most mistakes causing defensive problems. With both of those guys we are getting the 'double threat'...Little to no production with tons of opportunity, AND the worse players on the ice without the puck.

Florida came into the league as cup champions. As like boxing, the first team that beats them becomes reigning champ (I think it was Ottawa). They are champ until someone beats them and so on and so on. There is a guy on SM that tracks this every year, and right now San Jose is that reigning champion. As for Bedard, I wonder if he is impacted by the couple of minor...but possibly nagging...injuries he has had so far? He looks like a good player, especially for his age (I think 19), but he doesn't seem to have taken that step from last year to this year you would expect with someone of his pedigree.

I think there is a middle ground on the Rex Ryan hiring. I think Brandon may have wanted him, but ultimately it didn't take much convincing for Kim and Terry to go with it. The hiring was on all of them. But I agree with just about everything else you said. Terry is not a good owner. He is somewhere between "A thin skinned boss, not a leader, who takes any criticism personally" and a "owner/fan who treats his team like a 14 year old middle school boy would."

If hockey worked more like boxing, San Jose would be the current champions.

Back then when that whole situation went down, I put it on Lafontaine. Pegula was still rather new here, he told us about hockey heaven, he told us he would do what was needed, spend the money to make the Sabres a winner. If there was friction, well, it wasn't because of our glorious new wonderful owner, could it be? No way! After years have gone by, I look at that as possibly a little bit different.

When you have a 'soft and sensative' owner, you have to be careful. Rip the team, or even question the owner too much (or even a little) and you might have a phone call to your employer asking/tellin you to stop, and if you don't, your press pass (or whatever they call it today) being pulled and only being re-issued to someone in your organization who will not offend Terry so much. Now, I'm not exactly sure how that works in the NHL, but I do know that I would not put that beyond Pegula.

Maybe. The problem is you need an OWNER who also wants a team in Buffalo. If the NHL approves someone new to be an owner, they are going to want someone pretty 'rich' that likes and wants to make money for themself and the other owners. How does Buffalo get a team 'back' when that would likely be in a 30+ year old arena that needs a lot of work, in a city with so many less people and money....versus other massive cities with a ton more money, that probably would be willing to help build a brand new, state of the art arena that simply could not be done in Buffalo (especially with the region and state just giving money to a new stadium for the Bills). Even IF the league wanted a team in Buffalo even more than those other cities (not sure I think that is the case but even if it was true), what multi-Billionaire is going to step forward and choose Buffalo (and the Arena here) as the place they will make even more money vs those other cities?

We are for sure on the same page with your post, you and I. Its just after last nights game, it is very hard to try to convince myself of the above, to be positive, even knowing it may be true. I want Cozens and Quinn 1,000 miles away from this team. I want Lindy to hold a press conference spewing fire and brimstone, calling out names. What you are saying in your above posts makes the most sense, but being a fan is emotional, and its hard to side with the logical side of things right now. I woke up this morning and said I'm going to step away from the team for a while, its not worth it anymore. Yet I am positing as much this morning as any other morning I can remember, at least maybe that is a good thing?

I'm not sure if you are more disappointed in practice being canceled or disappointed in no media availablity. I'd be happy with Lindy talking to the media and calling out names. Just lay into people. Would it help the team play better? Maybe not, but I know Lindy has that in him and I'd just be happy to hear it at this point (make me feel SOMETHING about the team).

Lindy Ruff may be a good coach. I think he is. Any doubt I had listening to him talk about hockey and I think he is. When he talks to the media, he talks differently than Granato. He talks about what needs to change. He identifies what went wrong and how to change it. He talks about how players are playing well and what needs to be done when they aren't. He brings up things that I haven't thought about, and I haven't heard on this forum from anyone else (specifics). I think he knows hockey, he knows how to coach, and the game has not 'passed him buy'. BUT...there comes a point where what do you do if you aren't getting through to the players? What else can be done? My impression, and this is the positive spin on Lindy....is that he identifies a problem with the team or individual players, talks to them about it, addresses it, it gets 'fixed' for a game or two, but then the players just keep falling back into the same habits in short order? If as a coach you address an issue, take care of it, but the players keep on doing it in the future, what else can you do? And I know on this board I'm back to blasting Cozens (and Quinn) like almost never before, but they make SO many bad plays without the puck. They are so awful and bring negatives to the team when they aren't scoring (and they sure aren't doing that), that why do you keep playing them? Why does Cozens continue to get the 3rd or 4th most ice time on the team? Why are they near the top of the team in offensive zone starts? Why does Cozens, DYLAN COZENS, lead your forwards in power play ice time? (and Quinn is 6th, being a fixture on your 2nd unit)? I'm flabbergasted by Lindy continuing to roll those guys out there. Nothing says they are doing anything besides hurting the team. The stats (production and plus-minus), even the advanced stats that are 'good' have to be taken with a grain of salt knowing their zone starts and their low shooting percentage. They devastate their own D-men and hang them out to dry making them look worse than they are. All I can think is that Lindy is getting strong encouragement, if not direct orders, from above to keep playing them (Adams or Pegula or both). It doesn't make sense that Lindy would just roll them out there like he is otherwise.

Deep down when I take emotion out of it, I agree with you. Despite what others think, I think the Defense of this team is pretty good/good enough. Now, they SHOULD be playing better. My top 2 issues on the Defense are: 1.) Samuelsson. It looked like at one point he was going to be a top 50 stay-at-home rock back there. He isn't available and he is nothing of the sort. 2.) Dahlin. He's the best D-man on this team overall, but 1.5 years ago he looked to be on his way to being elite, Norris level. Hes good, but you aren't paying him and didn't draft him #1 overall to be 'good'. He needs to control the game from the back end and he isn't doing that. Clifton I'm happy with as a 3rd pair, 15 minutes per game at the most guy. Power has HUGE up and down games, but I'm fine with his 'progress'. Bryram isn't a perfect defender but I'd be happy with him extended. Forwards are an issue. Cozens and Quinn are the 2 players most responsible for this team not being a playoff spot right now. As I mentioned other places, its not just their lack of production. They aren't producing. They are making more mistakes without the puck than ANY other 2 players on the team. And that lack of production is coming with them taking up Power play time and getting 55-60% offensive zone starts. They are the 2 players most responsible for sinking the team. Tuch is not an issue now, but going forward, I think you need to think long and hard about how much you pay him and for how long when his deal is up at the end of next year. Right now you are getting 'peak' Alex Tuch. That is a good player. Not a great one. When his next deal starts, he's going to be on the downside of his career. Tage, for all his faults and injuries, is worth every dollar you are paying him at $7m per year. If you can sign Peterka for less than that, I think he is well worth it. Benson is an interesting one to me. Many here love his game. Many here say he is the only one who shows up night to night. But, EVENTUALLY I need more production from him, and while it seems the refs have it out for him, some of the penalties he takes are really really dumb. A purge may not be required, but what is required are move RIGHT NOW to make this team better. You can't get to the point before January 1st where you are basically writing the season off because you are so far out of it and looking foward to 'maybe' playoffs in the spring of 2026. Because right now if they don't fix things, our best hope as fans will be to look foward to MAYBE seeing a playoff game in 2026. If you listen to 590 out of Toronto (the radio station in North America that probably focuses on hockey as much as anywhere), the Sabres are 50% laughing stock, and 50% irrelevant. The thing is when they get brought up, both of those things are brought up at the same time. Over the decade plus of the drought, the hosts and 'insiders' were never at the level with those 2 things with the Sabres that they are now. Around the league, the overall opinion of the Buffalo Sabres I think is as low as its ever been. Even when they team was taking, when the team was as bad as they were in the Dahlin Draft year, at least the opinion around the league was 'in a few years, they will have enough talent they will be good'. Just 2 seaons ago Elliote Friedman said on their show something like "Buffalo is going to be really hard to handle with Dahlin, Power, and Samuelsson back there really soon" Now, nothing. No comments like that. This team just isn't on anyones radar anymore as a threat this season or anytime in the near future.

I truly think that if Quinn and Cozens did not play at all this season, and instead the Sabres inserted 2 $3-4m per year vets that played decent positionally and were career 10-15 goal scorers, I think this team would have won a couple more game and would be in, or very near, a playoff position now. The goal is not to slide into the playoffs and then lose and be out in a week. So yeah, the team 'needs' more than just those 2 being replaced. But they are taking up minutes, offensive zone starts, PP time and not producing, basically at all. In addition, they are both turning into massive liabilities without the puck. Replacement level guys (competent journeyman 3rd line guys) would be better for this team at the moment.

4.) 2 forward to replace Quinn and Cozens on the roster

I don't think that would happen, that is the problem. For better or worse, the league was falling over itself to keep a team in the phoenix market. They don't care at all about a passionate fanbase in a small city (if they did Quebec city, with a much nicer/newer Arena than Buffalo, would have a team "back there" already). The league cares about market sizes like Houston (closing in on 8 millon), Atlanta or Phoenix (5+ million and growing), Austin, Orlando, Charlotte, San Antonio, Austin San Diego and others (2.5-3+ million) more than they do about Buffalo (Metro size 1.1million)...and it looks at Money (most of those markets have an area "GDP" of 3-6 times what Buffalo has). If Buffalo did lose the Sabres, in no way, in no world do I see them moving in front of Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, or a 2nd GTA team. No way.