mjd1001

It does? OK I guess. Not for me. I'm not saying he is bad, good, great, someone I like or you like. All I'm saying is he is not the elite scorer many wanted him to be. After all, you know what means more than him being 'arguably' the best player on a good team in the West? Years and Years of stats where he was on good teams, bad teams, awful teams, below average teams, playing full seasons, partial seasons, playing hurt, playing totally healthy...etc. I'll take my 'stats' supporting a point about where he ranks as an offensive force in the league compared to any other forward...over how good of an 'overall' player he is based on less than 30 games in one particular season.

Of course there are always exceptions to the rule..but the rule is very strong. -Last year in the East, every team that was positive made the playoffs. Every team that was negative missed -Last year in the West, 9 teams were positive, 7 of them made the playoffs. 7 teams were negative, 6 missed the playoffs. -If you go back to the last time we had a full season, 2018-2019, things are similar --Then in the East 9 teams were positive. The top 8 of those made the playoffs. All negative teams missed the playoffs. --In the west, every single positive team made the playoffs, every single negative team missed. So is it a perfect predictor? No, but if you are positive at goal differential, odds are GREAT you make the playoffs, if you are negative odds are you miss, and it is overall a good predictor of just how good a team is in the long run.

At this point I think we can with confidence say we know what Eichel is, a very good offensive player, but falling well short of Elite. -This year he is 43rd in the league in points, 31st in points per game. -Since the start of the 2020 season, he has missed too many games to even see where he ranks in total points, but in that time he is 57 in the league in points per game. -his 2 most productive seasons were 18-19 and 19-20. Just taking those seasons (his two best) and he was 16th in points per game. -Since his career started he is 25th in the league in points per game. -Even his impact on Vegas has been marginal. The season before he got there and last year until he played, they won about 69% of their games. Since he started playing even with their very very hot start this year, as of today they are winning about 73% of their games. Not much of a difference in regular season performance. He is a good player, a very good offensive player. But he is going to be someone that you expect to be about 25th in the league in points, and if he has a great year he will 'top out' in the 6-12th in the league. Good? yes. Very good? yes. But not likely someone Sabres fans (for the most part) will miss and wish he was still here compared to not making the trade.

Goal differential to me shows they are getting better. In the long run, it might be the single most predictive stat of how good a team is outside of record. The 'standings' dont' show an improvement, but goal differential sure does, and that is a team stat I like.

The Sabres have a positive goal differential, yet a losing record. From the far-away big picture it is not they are playing bad, but they might be the most incosistent team: -They are 3w 9L in 1 and 2 goal games. 10w and 5L in 3+ goal games. That is a big difference. Not only that, but no other team has a greater percentage of all of their wins happen in 3+ goal games. -I just noticed this. Hits. Sabres are the lowest BY FAR in hits. I know recording of that stat can be pretty variable and Buffalo seems to have a reputation of not having the official scorer recording many in Buffalo, but they are very low. 406 on the year is last in the league, 72 behind the 2nd worst team. Top teams are at or close to 900 (Philly, Pitt, NYR). -Blocked shots they are 2nd worst in the league. Last in hitting, 2nd last in blocked shots.....that gives a lot of material to those who big on "team toughness, sacrificing your body" crowd. Personally those things don't matter THAT much to me, but either roster contruction or play style seem to lean in that direction.

Its not just the glass half empty crowd. There truly is a middle ground called realists. And yes, to the optimist a 'realist' is looking like they ar half empty but they are not. So yes, there is a lot of hockey left. Yes, very often a team in the Sabres position this time of year DOES get really hot and does make the playoffs. Yes, it does happen and it CAN happen with the Sabres. But it is more than just '7 points out'. It is how many teams ahead of you that matters also. If you are 7 points behind one team with no one else between you, fine. But if there is a team 7 points ahead of you, one 6 points, a couple 4 or 5....then you have to pass all those teams for one spot When you are just chasing one team, you are hoping/betting on OTHER teams around the NHL to beat that one team so you can make up points. But when there are so many teams in front of you, those 'other' teams you need to beat the team 7 points ahead of you will be gaining points themself while doing so, making them harder to catch. Glass half empty..."Sabres have no shot, hole is too big." Glass half full..."they can do it, I can see a clear path to the playoffs" the truth is probably someplace in between.

I'm sure he wants to win, but I think it is mostly about money. With 31g in 70 games last year, and 20 in 28 this year, he is probably thinking...he is in the prime of his career, this is going to be his ONE big contract, hes sure he is a legit 40g scorer, and he sees younger guys getting better offers than he was given who haven't proved what he has. I think he wants a long term deal at $9-$10m per year. JT Miller just got $8m per year, and Horvat figures he is a few years younger and has scored more goals for the team over the past 2 years total. Or me might be looking at the over $9 Barzal just signed and thinking he is MUCH more productive than him.

Thinking about this after the last 2 losses.... 1.) time. Cozens, Peterka and Quinn look to be legit NHLers that will get better but it will take time. Power is an NHL player but he will get better with time. Krebs can't get much worse with time, so hopefully he'll get better too. There are more important players on this team that are young enough that they will get better with time than ones on the downside who will get worse. If this EXACT team were to be put on the ice next year, with ZERO changes, they will be a better team than they are this year. 2.) figure out the 3rd line with guys who can be productive (somewhat) with mid-level ice time (15-16 minute per game) and no PP time. Your first line is set. Your young guns like might have ups and downs but they are good. Your 4th line is good enough to do what they need to do. That 3rd line is an issue. Don't need 3 new guys, but find 1 or two so you can get maybe 40-50 goals out of it (at least) without being a defensive liability. 3.) Goaltending. UPL still might get better. Comrie hasn't had even a quarter season here non-injured. Maybe its them with no outside help. Maybe you need someone else. Find a way to get better goaltending going forward than you have in the past. 4.) I guess D-depth. Everyone (just about) wants better 3rd pair guys, but no one is willing to give up a 2nd pair guy so he can be your 'better' 3rd pair guy. So time, fix a 3rd line, and get better goaltending. That is all you need now. Don't reach for something else and overpay (money or assets), change for the sake of change is something a lot of fans want, I'd rather be patient.

Of course it applies, everyone gets tired with a larger workload in a short period of time. It may not apply as much to someone younger than older, but it applies to almost everyone. Are you trying to say that the effort/results would be the same if they Sabres were not on the back end of a home and home but Pitt was? Again, I'm not comparing Buf to Pitt in that single situation, I am talking about all situations on the end of a back to back.

Because it does apply sometime. The world isn't black and white and neither is hockey. it is a factor. It would appear to be a bigger factory if Pitt wasn't on back to backs also, but because Pitt was also doesn't mean it doesn't contribute to the effort the Sabres put forward vs if they WEREN'T on back to back.

Yes, I sure do. But you only picked out one part of what I said...if we are just talking that that ONE game, the other 2 points I make apply.

It especially hurts early in the year because Pittsburgh is one of the teams the Sabres were chasing for the last wildcard spot. Over 27-28 hours if the had won both of those games instead, they'd already only bee 4 points out of a spot and 3 behind Pittsburgh. Maybe we all got a little TOO excited about the whole team based on wins over San Jose and Columbus...both of which are currently 2 of the worst teams in the league. Those wins count of course, but since Thanksgiving, this team is only 3-5, with those 3 wins in OT vs Detroit and against the previously mentioned San Jose and Columbus. They are 'growing' but there is still a lot of work to do.

I agree. Lacking desperation? When you are not good enough you don't look desperate. When you are really good you dont' have to look desperate. Desperate means you aren't good enough to be in the lead but good enough to control the puck. If/when they play better, ARE better, or are not on the back end of back to backs......then they will 'look' more desperate.

Now 2wins and 11 losses versus the top 10 peforming teams in the league (as I listed in another thread)

Agree. VO has shown he can put away chances on that line. Krebs is playing SLIGHTLY better than before, but still might be the worst forward on this team (overall gameplay, all 3 zones) and the coaching staff must think so as he is getting the lowest ice time again.

I missed most of the game last night, just rewatched the highlights of the Sabres goals and goals against. Some thoughts on what they allowed: -1st Pitt goal. The PK seemed to be chasing a bit, they really didn't maintain the 4 man box, when their rotation got all out of sorts, that is When Pitt found the opening. No one really screwed up too bad, but they didn't maintain any kind of discipline on the PK there. -2nd Pitt goal: A loose puck that didn't get cleared. No major mistakes again, but you would like to see Power clear that. Tuch then swipes at it and misses it. I want a good save there also I didn't get. Again, no major breakdown, but a bit more luck/effort/skill from Power, Tuch, or Anderson probably prevents that one (again, none of them made a major mistake, give Pitt some credit for putting on good pressure) -3rd Pitt goal: I need a save there from my goalie. The shooter scores from a terrible angle, probably 35 feet out, and isn't screened. 100% on the goalie there. -OT Pitt Winner: 4 on 3 in OT, you are going to give up chances like that. Problem there was simply taking a penalty going in OT. I didn't see the whole game, had no sense of the game flow, just watched some highlights. As far as the D-zone goes, none of the goals allowed were a cause of major giveaways right before the shooter scored. I don't know if Anderson played a better game the rest of the time I didn't see it, but 1, probably 2 goals that were scored should have been saves. I did note some really crazy ice time stats. Bryson with about 8 minutes ice time, Fitz with 6:48. I guess you really, REALLY don't trust those guys if you push your top 4 so hard knowing you have to travel for a back-to-back the next night. Top 4 ALL with 24-26 minutes. all 4 of them. Krebs was the only forward back below 10 minutes. Thompson with 23 minutes. For a forward, I would like to see a little less...and I see he led the team in Penalty killing time. I know you want a more rounded game from him and maybe he is becoming a better Penalty killer, but I would think you could find one of your 'effort' guys out there to replace those minutes for Thompson penalty killing....give him that time to rest, so he is more rested in all other situations. Last night Cozens only had about about 16 minutes ice time (almost 7 minutes less than Tage) but also had only half the PK time. Mitts with no PK time, and he has turned at least into a decent Penalty killer. I'd like to see Thompsons minutes PK (at least some of them) more go to those guys to spread out the ice time.

So far this year, I think the top 12 teams are, in some order, Boston, Toronto, Jersey, Colorado, Tampa, Vegas, Florida, Carolina, Pitt, Dallas, Edmonton, Winnipeg. The Sabres are 2W and 10L against that set of teams. I know most teams will have a bad record vs the top of the schedule, but they really REALLY need to start getting a few more wins vs some of the better teams. 2-10 isn't close to good enough. Its fun and great to beat up on San Jose and an injury riddled Columbus team...

A little off topic, but I had a discussion the other day about a 'players around the league issue' If/When there ever is another World cup of hockey, or Olympics, how close would the USA be now to matching Canada's top lines up front. With McDavid and McKinnon for Canada down the center, tough to match...but....the USA would be able to roll out somthing like: Mathews, Thompson, and Eichel at Centers....with Wingers including Jason Robertson, both Tkachuks, Jack Hughes (at C or wing) Gaudreau and Maybe Kreider or Kyle Conner. I might prefer Canada up front overall, but I could see a USA team/lineup like that having games where they are better.

Looks like light snow or flurries at kickoff for Sunday's game against the Jets, kinda-but-not-too windy, with a chance the light snow turns to drizzle by the end of the game. Not ideal conditions, but not bad enough to really take away anything the Bills want to do.

I like Dunleavy. I don't catch many mistakes he makes, and as Pimlach said, he does well as a 'nuetral' announcer but I like that. Sure, I loved RJ doing the games but in all honesty, I prefer guys that are a bit less excitable. Jack Edwards style...or the guy who used to (and maybe still does) the Penguins games? No thank you. On the other hand, The tv guy that I saw from San Jose (I watched part of the SJ broadcast for the Sabres game), he wasn't very loud but he was very good. So It took me a little while to get used to Dunleavy, but I like him. I'm happy he's the PBP guy for the team.

Right now this teams top 2 lines are playing great, and the 4th line is doing what you need them to do. The 3rd line is the glaring, gaping hole right now. What do you want in a 3rd liner? I want to focus one someone who can be somewhat productive with lesser minutes (doesn't need 17-20 minutes per game to produce) and can produce without PP time. Someoone with the basic skills that they CAN move up to a 2nd line in case of injuries. Hopefully someone in that 25-30 years of age category. Who is that? I have no idea. but I don't need a top 10 pick or a guy on pace to score 30+ goals. Just find me a guy who can get me 15, MAYBE 20 goals but does that with 3rd line minutes and minimal PP time. That will fill a major hole on this team.

Well with the extra point for OT losses, it is more possible than it used to be. 107 point pace was referenced a few times above. 10 teams (1/3 of the league) had over 107 point for the entire seasnon last year. If 1/3 of the league can do it for the entire year, a good team should be able to do that for less than a season. 8 teams had 110 points over the entire year. So I decided to look a bit more into it...lets look at 110 points: -8 teams did that over the entire year, of the team that did not make 110 points.. -St. Louis played at a 110 point pace over the first half of theseason. -Boston played at a 113 point pace from Jan 1 through the end of the year (more than half the season) -Edmonton played at a 114 point pace the 2nd half of the season -Pittsburgh played at a 114 point pace the 1st half of the season -Los Angeles almost made it (108 points) in the 2nd half of the season I didn't bother to look into any other teams, but if you really looked into the stats, it looks like half the league either got 110 points in an entire season, or had periods of half the season (or more than half the season) where they were on a 110 point pace. So not only does it happen it is acutually pretty common.

I don't want to start an unrelated war with the comments I'm about to make but here goes: I know a few people that I talk to about the Sabres that say similar things. Root for Eichel (almost more than the Sabres), think the Risto trade was bad...The team got fleeced in the ROR/Tage trade no matter what happens going forward, the team will never win because they are soft...need players like Ramsey, Shoenfeld, Korab (because they were REAL players) etc, etc. All of them have a couple things in common....they are all over 55 years old, they all will die on the hill that in EVERY sport Defense wins championships all the time, and if anyone scores more than 1 goal in a game against you or throws more than 2 td passes against you the only solution is to hit them hard over and over and over to 'teach them a lesson'.

I like to think you are never 'out of it' until you can't 'get back in it. Seriously, it is slightly annoying when an NFL team is down something like 27-13 in the 3rd quarter...then they score a TD and the announcers always say "they are back in it!" Again, you aren't out of it until you can't even get close to being 'back in it'. With the Sabres, I really think it is a matter of small steps. I mentioned earlier, there are 10 games left in December. Get 13-14 points in the next 10. Is that acheivable? Sure is. At that point you probably find yourself only 3-5 points (give or take a point) out of the last wildcard with more than half the season left. Not only not out of it, but at that point 'right in the thick' of it.

I'd still keep Olofsson. Until there is a clear replacement on the roster, and that young replacement is proven, I'll keep a very streaky but very good PP guy around. I currently think his current goal-less streak is more a factor of how bad his line overall is playing. He isnt not a great 2 way player, but again, unless I'm getting a useful player or a 1st rounder back I keep him until some young guy forces him out. I agree with that.