mjd1001
-
Posts
3,610 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mjd1001
-
-
Just now, LGR4GM said:
No. Clearly they wanted to move on yes, but that wasn't because of "something going on". He is over 30 and the Bills need to get better. Diggs was traded to clear cap and get better. Probably won't be better this season but next with the lower cap and such it will be.
The only thing I think of beyond his sliding production/age (and I do think that is the main issue) is, why take such a big cap hit this year (over $30 million it appears) if its just him getting older. They could just play him less, not dress him, etc rather than taking that cap hit. I still think there might be some behind the scenes stuff going on (or maybe if they played him less they might be AFRAID he would start doing that?)
I guess you can just say this is the 'reset year'. Its not only about the cap hit, but if he's not part of your future, and the 'present' isn't as good as many thing, just move on, do the best you can in 2024, and reset and re-load for 2025.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, MISabresFan said:
We can all speculate on what happens in the Dugout or behind closed doors. As a fan, what I see on the field is more important. There where times when he took plays off, wouldn't block, and sometimes short armed receptions. I will miss the drama and excitement he brought when he was on, but lately it was more drama than excitement.
His play seems to be sliding.
Eye test: He was finding holes in zones where Allen hit him, but he wasn't making really any great plays, didn't seem to fool guys or blow by guys as much as he did a year or two ago.
Stats: His last 13 games in a row he didn't exceed 100 yards receiving. In those 13 games, 7 of those 13 games, he didn't even get to 50 yards receiving.
Age is catching up to him (and if it is, hes not likely to get better next year and likely might get worse) or Allen doesn't want to throw to him as much. You aren't getting rid of Allen so either of those 2 things are bad.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Early reports are the Bills having to take on $31million in cap space due to this. They must have REALLY thought he is on the downside, where his performance can be replaced by a top rookie, or there must REALLY be some problems he is causing with the team.
I mean, if his skill is dropping off that fast, you could just bench him/not dress him and not take that cap hit. To take THAT much of a cap hit for a 2nd rounder in 2025, there had to be some serious isssues I would think.
-
I'm OK with this move. Some are huge fans of Diggs, I really never was.
Mostly because I'm not big on the 'diva' WR thing. I get it, social media tweets are just 'playing with the fans', and they can/might mean nothing. To some people its entertaining, I get that, but its not really for me. But as far as play on the field, it looked like the end of the 2022 season, he might have been taking a very slight step back. Last year his performance for sure was starting to slide (to me). If they are projecting that is going to continue to happen, and they are thinking this year is a partial 'reset/retool' year, then I can see them making this move. Its almost like...they are going to take a step back this year, roll the dice with major changes, to prepare next year for the 2nd half of Allens's career here.
-
1 hour ago, sabrefanday1 said:
Not exactly sure what this means??? Th eguy had numerous chances with variou steams and reall ygo dplayers and did nothing. Now with of all teams Columbus he is suddenly the sniper that he suppose to be with the Sabres? Strange...
Amazed how the Leafs keep outscoring other teams while getting really good goaltending from yes three goalies and with a awful deense and a coach that is so similar to Meatballs. No system...just go out and outscore the other team. They look like the Sabres did towards the end of last season. At least they are exciting to watch, as the Sbres were last year (not this year...dull, boring and unintetrested most games it seems)
Not sure what it means? It just means a player that used to be in the Sabres organization is currently on a very hot run, and maybe has turned the corner into a legit NHL scorer.
Many people on this board LIKE to keep track of former members of this team, so I"m not sure why you are questioning what it means be me posting it?
-
4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
The Sabres are like 22nd in HDcf and 25th in HDCF%. Sure their HDsh% is 31st in the league but lets not act like they are playing some really great offensive hockey and just getting really unlucky. They are bottom third in the league all while being 14th in the league in total sh%.
They don't generate enough HD chances and I would bet money one of the reasons they don't score on them is because a lot of their HD chances are single shots, not shots with rebounds and traffic.
So I reject what you say here. They are bottom third in high danger chances for and high danger chance percentage all while having the 14th best sh% overall in the league. Yes their actual sh% in HD situations is bad at 31st overall but they don't get enough chances anyway. This team isn't coached well and is running a watered down krueger-esque offense because Granato suddenly decided they had to change after what was working last year.
If you look at both the raw numbers and the percentages, they are only a small number (in terms of raw numbers) away form middle-of-the-pack in terms of high danger chances/shots....yet their percentages are WAY off. So, combine chances generated, shots taken, where they are taken from, with shooting percentages....and it is the players not converting that is the vast majoirty of the shortfall, not how often they are in position.
If you run the numbers all the way though, and you will see if the players improved their performance (just revert to last year's mean OR be average in the league) and this team would be a lot better.
-
Alex Nylander scored 2 more last night..
Now with 10 goals in 17 games since traded to Columbus (48 goal pace over 82 games)
-
20 minutes ago, jad1 said:
Nah, Granato is bad. He's the sixth longest tenured coach in the league right now. What are we going to learn next year that we already don't know about him?
He's looked good in comparison to Krueger, but that's a low bar.
I'd rather role the dice with the unknown than spend another year of failure with Granato. The same goes with Adams.
Why is Granato bad? Serious question. The results are bad, but when you dig into the metrics....what I see is a team that has improved its defensive zone coverage from last year. A team that GETS good scoring chances from high danger areas, just converts them at the lowest rate in the league (that has nothing to do with coaching, they are getting the chances, they are in position, they just aren't converting them).
The thing I see keeping this team out of the playoffs more than anything else is simply the players not coverting shot into goals, getting shots in great areas, 2 on ones, breakaways, and just not converting those chances at anywhere near the rate of most other teams. The coaching staff is not perfect, but the guys are in position to score, how is another coaching staff going to make them better shooters?
-
On 3/31/2024 at 2:10 PM, DarthEbriate said:
I'd be curious to know Dahlin's +/- with the Sabres goalie pulled this season.
Despite a career high in goals scored, he's not having the dynamic season he had last year. However, he's got a higher Corsi 5-on-5 than last season, and more blocked shots and hits. An average powerplay would have him closer to 70 points. He probably still tries to do too much and occasionally blows an assignment like every other defender. But overall, having the forwards do their jobs and finding a legitimate 2nd D pairing will be the things that make Dahlin a Norris contender.
Dahlin looks to be up on goals since last year but way down on assists. A simple reason he is down on assists? The guys in front of him (that he plays with most often) just aren't shooting as well. Tuch's Shooting percentage is down from over 16% to about 11%. Thompson from about 16% to only near 11% this year. Skinner down from 14.5% last year to about 12% this year. Cozens nearly cut in half from over 14% last year to about 8% this year.
The thing is, those guys are getting about the same number of shots per game as last year, and a month or so ago the advanced fancy stats showed that at least with Cozens and Thompson, they were getting shots from the high danger areas (quality chance) about the same as last year. Meaning, Dahlin is getting the pucks up the ice and on to those guys sticks, they just aren't putting them in the net and he is getting less assists because of it. (which also impacts his plus-minus in a negative way).
And as for those 'league leaders' and 'Norris candidates' ahead of Dahlin....Quinn Hughes in Vancouver. Makar. Josi. Hedman. What do they have that Dahlin doesn't have? Not any (or many) more goals, but they do have forward on their team that put the puck in the net a lot better than the Sabres forwards, giving them a lot more assists than Dahlin gets. Vancouvers top 4 goal scorers up front average almost 20% shooting percentage between them. Colorado's top 3 guys are at 13.1, 15.8, and 17.7. Tampa's top 4 guys have almost 140 goals between them and are average about 20% shooting.
Buffalo? Every single player on the team with at least 10 goals is shooting under 13%.
And when you break down the Sabres shooting..."high danger" chances (directly in front of the net), the league besides the Sabres shoots about 20%. The Sabres...14.1%. Colorado? 20.5% Vancouver? 23.4%.
So, Dahlin not being near the top of the league in points and assists (along with goals) might just be more of a function of the players he plays with being SO MUCH worse than the rest of the league at putting the puck into the net, even from prime scoring areas.
As you said, leading the league in ice time, improving corsi, improving hits, improving blocked shots....if he had the assists that would go with better play up front, he just might be in the Norris converstation this year (and when looking at those numbers, if the Sabres were even AVERAGE at how much they produce from the high danger areas, they would probably be in the playoffs right now.
-
2
-
2
-
-
58 minutes ago, wingnut said:
After reading the last few posts (a lot of news to me) - what if KA really is/could be a good GM, just not under this ownership LOL
I beleive that. I also think Granato is a pretty darn good development coach and might be a good coach overall. However, Its hard to know that with what might be going on from the top down. I'll give into the fact that if Granato is back next year and the team starts out terrible, then fine, fire him. But 2 things: Who that is better are you going to get to take the job? And whoever you get to take the job, are they going to be working under less than ideal conditions and will you get the best from them?
-
Does he have any Pride? He has MORE desire to have rose pedals thrown at his feet by his employees than he does have pride to make tough decisions or put people in place in his organization that will make decisions he doesn't personally like.
To be honest, I (and probably most people) have really no idea what kind of owner he is, how involved he is in the 'on the ice' product..any of that.
So anything I think/say is little more than a guess.
With that said, I am 'guessing' he isn't a good owner and a lot of the issues here are his fault. I get the impression he meddles around the edges a LOT. Erhoff and Ville Leino, it seemed like a lot of smoke he insisted on those signings (I think Erhoff, one of his kids admitted Pegula wanted him, not so much management) and they were overpays. Skinner, I get the impression from a lot of 'chatter', Pegula wanted/was responsible for the trade (not a bad trade) and the extension (not a good extension). The Lafontaine/Ted Black/Tim Murray/ other personal fiascos....if he wasn't responsible for them he was involved. I remember an interview years ago during Bills training camp, he would insist on sitting in on the coaching meetings, he said himself he didn't give his opinion alot but he DID ask a lot of questions (I'm sure the coaches LOVED the owner sitting on on many of their meetings and interrupting with frequent questions about stuff he didn't know about). So yeah....
Does he have the right do do any/all of that? As the owner he sure does. But I'm also guessing it doesn't make a good work environment for many coaches/management guys. Also, with the Sabres it SEEMS he didn't just want decisions run by him, but rather he wanted input into hockey related decisions. And finally, the Kevin Adams hire...I like Adams (still, lets see how I feel in another year or two), but the hire seemed less like the 'best guy for the job' or even the 'best available guy for the job who would take it'...and more like someone Terry was comfortable around...someone who would talk to Terry and give him the attention he thought he wanted or deserved.
The saying goes, it starts from the top down. With the Sabres, I really REALLY do feel like Pegula just not being a good owner in a ton of small ways has infected this franchise and that infection has spread over the last decade+.
I'm pretty sure he wants to win. But, it seems to me he wants to be comforable with those around him more than winning (he doesn't want any conflict directed toward him and he wants his ego massaged and he wants to feel included). Its almost he would rather lose and have THAT than to win and even think its possible, if only in his own mind, to be told 'get the hell out of our meetings' by those who work for him.
One thing I think is true....no owner ever took over a franchise and was owner for this long and had a WORSE impact on the franchise compared to anyone that came before him. Probably true for all of the major north American sports. The speach where he said the goal of the Sabres is nothing else but to win a Stanley cup...and then to follow that with EVERY SINGLE FULL SEASON he was owner of the team to the the worst stretch of not even making the playoffs in the HISTORY of the sport...it is laughable.
-
1
-
-
As with many things, it is hard to view this in a vacuum. Its not for me so much who should be here or not in a binary fashion, but it has to do with what type of player are they going to be next year and how much will they cost?
Who can go.
-Comrie. He can/should be gone. I wanted to like him as a backup, but its just not there.
-Krebs. I don't think they will 'give up' on him yet, but I wasn't a fan of him when he got here, a BRIEF moment I liked his play a month or so ago, but he isn't bringing much now. If he is back, he has to show a lot in camp. I wouldn't be upset if he was moved in a trade though.
-Jost. If he is back as an AHL guy fine, but he seems to be bringing less now than he did when he arrived.
-VO. I like him. I like if you use him the right way where he can score you 20-30. The Sabres are NOT committed to putting him in that situation, so as much as I think he is blamed for being worse than he is, there really isn't a spot here anymore.
-Bryson/Jokiharju. I think Jokiharju is slightly better, but I think you pick ONE of them as a 3rd pair guy, and you move on from the other.
Who will/should be here but you need more:
-Tage. I think he's playing hurt, but you need him to give you 40, maybe 50 goals. Get healthy
-Skinner. He's not good defensively, but I have yet to have anyone show me how he is a liability (meaning he CAUSES goals against) more than many other forwards on this team. With that said, if he is giving you 25 goals a year, I'm not getting rid of him until someone else currently not on the team can replace those 25+ goals.
-Cozens. He has gotten to be much less of a liability in his own zone over the last few months, but for what you are paying him he needs to guarantee you 25 goals a year, hopefully closer to 30+ and he has to be a guy that at SOME points shows he is a top player on this team, not just a 'good complimentary' one.
-Power/Bryam/Benson. They are really young. Just be a little bit better each year from the previous year. Can't regress at all if this team is going to be good.
-Greenway. Yeah he brings something different than most other players on this team, but if he is going to spend ANY time on even a 2nd line, I need 15-20 goals out of him. If he can't give you that, he needs to be a 3rd/4th liner.
-Samuelsson. I still am not sure exactly how good he is, but I need 70+ games out of him to find out.
Finally, guys that other people seem to not like but I have no problem with (with respect to their performance vs their pay/roll)
-Tuch, Zemgus, Quinn, Peterka, UPL, Dahlin, Clifton. They are all fine.
-
5 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:
My first thought is that anyone who writes off a 20 year old dman hasn't leant the lesson that history keeps teaching over and over and over again.
My second thought is you are probably right about Skinner but it's virtually impossible. girgensons does bring something to this team and you need a couple of more guys like him to fill out your 4th line
Krebs is a young centre trying to find his way, if he is part of a trade , I won't have any issue with this
The people wanting him out of town continues to baffle me. He is a good to great forchecker, he is one of the faster skaters on the team. He does not make glaring errors in his own zone leading to goals, AND he scores as much (actually statistically at a higher rate) than most 4th liners in the league. He's a 4th liner, and a very good one.
-
6
-
-
4 hours ago, Pimlach said:
Gritty , gutsy, scrappers because the effort should be there.
…. actually prefer a balanced combination of both.
Yeah, as many have said you need both.
If you give me the choice of 95 point team with gutsy scrappers, or a 95 point team of fast skating, goal scoring guys, I'll take the latter. For pure entertainment value, I strongly prefer the 6-5 win over a 3-1 win (even if the 6-5 win is a bit sloppy). But again, to GET to be that 95 point team you probably want a balace of both.
-
1
-
-
I still think he is playing hurt, as others have said. I also think, and have said a few times, that if he doesn't do anything silly and actually manages to heal up in the offseason, I think hes good for close to 50 goals next year.
-
2
-
-
No thank you. I'm not going to let someone so negative and filled with hate towards his team take away the fact that I liked watching this team play tonight.. And when they win a game, I have fun watching it.
But hey... After a come from behind win.... Home game, a hat-trick... To make a post like at the start of this thread... I'll say this, you have to be really behind your agenda in order to preempt anybody who can actually enjoy the game making comments about it just in case they had a good time watching it tonight.
-
5
-
1
-
1
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:
Hmmm....Power almost threw a body check there.....
The hit stats with Power are truly amazing.
Clifton has a LOT less ice time than Power but he has 182 hits on the year. Dahlin has 170. Samuelsson in half of a season has 106. Even Jokiharju has over 80. The top D-men in the league have over 200. Lauzon (Nashville) has almost 340.
Power? 39 hits for the year.
You have a bunch of guys around the league with over 20 hits per 60 minutes of play, Power? 1.53 hits per 60.
I mean, hes not a physical player, we have to accept that, but you almost have to think with numbers that low, he spends a LOT of time on the ice looking to avoid contact (even accidental/incidental contact) rather than just playing hockey.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, PromoTheRobot said:
Wow. These guys want Donny gone. Certainly aren't playing for him now.
Think about how many times an offensive possession ended with a misplayed pass? I have to ask what are they doing in practice? Is it more of that? And if not, why are you playing that way now?
The last 5 seconds really sums things up. Was it Dahlin with the puck? Forwards on either wing at the blue line. A pass to either would result in a shot on goal. Instead they run for the locker.
If they are going to be responsible for him being gone, I don't think its because they WANT him gone, I think its just a matter of they don't have any reason to listen, no desire to work. To me it would be more ineptitude and not caring enough...and not being motivated by the current coaching staf than it would be them WANTING him gone. Why would a player want someone gone who might make things TOO easy for them?
-
1
-
-
Cozens with almost 8.5 minutes ice time just in the first. (on pace for 25.5 minutes at that rate)
Krebs with 2.5, Skinner with just 3, even Tage with only 3:44 (on pace for under 12)
I know the Sabres were shorthanded taking 2 penalties, but it doesn't quite make up for THOSE numbers.
-
9 minutes ago, Slack_in_MA said:
Boring game.
agree. If you are going to lose, score some more goals even if it means losing bigger. The 2 teams the Sabres played last (Devils tonight, Ottawa the other night) aren't any better in the standings than the Sabres, they allow more goals than the Sabres, but they DO play faster and score more.
-
3 minutes ago, Night Train said:
I'm ready to bail.. can't do this again..
The beauty of not being too invested in the team, or at least not caring too much...is if they keep getting down so early on a Friday night, its easy to change over to movie night with the wife (as soon as she is ready, that is)
-
Is it me or is Cozens/Benson/Quinn out on the ice as much as the other 3 lines combined?
-
41 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Possibly.
For the record, I understand the somewhat hidden true subtext of your post was an implication that we, like New Jersey aren’t far off, but I can’t agree they are very analogous situations. Not least because, well, they made the playoffs last year. Step backs for a young team are common, it’s why I theorized last summer that I was worried our 91 points was the “ahead of schedule” thing and lo and behold: looks like it was
Actually making it last year puts them a great deal ahead until we actually finally do it. Speaking for myself, making it even once would go a LONG way. So much so that I’m saying next year it’s a strict necessity re: justifying an active following of the team
You are right that I do not think the Sabres are that far off, but I also agree with you that, despite the Sabres being around the same place as NJ in the standings this year, I think the Devils are WAY ahead. Their performance this year (New Jersey) gives me a little doubt...but I still think, they come back fully healthy to start the season next year and they are a 110+ point team next season. Even in the most optimistic scenario, one where most things fal into place nicely, I do not see that for the Sabres there. (despite how positive I am on their direction compared to many on the board)
The Sabres to me are a 'potential 95-100 point team' currently in an 85 point wrapper. The Devils are in that same 85 point wrapper, but inside is a 110 point team waiting to burst out. You want to be a 110 point team next season? 2 things to me that make you think that is possible. 1.) you were a 95-100 point team the year before. 2.) You were already a 110+ point team in the presious 2-3 years with a similar (young) roster. The Devils have that 2nd one.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I don’t think I’d be worrying if the opponent was whoever’s first overall: we are at the point where we are just playing out the stretch, the results don’t matter
I get it. Playing out the stretch for me, however, means the only reason I want to watch the games is to see a win on any given night. I'm not thinking of playoff implications, all I care about is watching a win, and I think NJ is a team, when they finally get healthy is one that can embarass anyone.
-
1
-
Peterka contact : Long-term or Bridge
in The Aud Club
Posted · Edited by mjd1001
It all depends on the money and your internal/analytical analysis.
If you think Peterka projects to be a 30 goal scorer for most of his career (he's there now, what will he be in his mid to late 20's?), then you give him the long term deal. You pay more now when you have cap space to save a little bit later when you have a lot of other bigger deals giving you less space under the cap.
You shouldn't bridge just because you are 'afraid' to make a mistake. If he is really good, giving him a bridge WOULD be the mistake. Again though, it depends on your internal analysis and what the asking price is. Without knowing those things, its hard to answer.
If you don't trust the current managment to make that decision, that is a whole different issue.