mjd1001
-
Posts
3,629 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mjd1001
-
-
12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
No, it absolutely does not mean that. It MIGHT mean that, but there is no necessary direct correlation.
One example, Risto got lots of experience here and went from a young player to a veteran, but it was only when he got to Philly that he praised his coach and turned his game around. Just being in the league longer guarantees nothing. If we tread water long enough we simply get to the next round of people wanting out. Not saying that will happen, but the idea that it just takes more time is absurd.
I guess I should not have said "literally guarantees" and instead said 'mostly guarantees' as the vast majority of D-men and D-units are better when they are older than what the Sabres unit is. MOST guys have their best years, MOST teams have the best D-unit play when their age/average age isn't under 23 years of age.
Still doesn't change my opinion of the team. I LIKE Adams playing the long game. I do not want to do anything too risky to upset that (yeah, I would be open to trading some prospects for a vet, but not just any vet and certainly not many of the names being floated around here). I also am oveall happy with Granato at coach. If there are those around here that just want to be negative about the team, the coach, and the GM I guess that is going to happen. I'm not there.
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
Granato is well past the date for his expiry. No other team would have given his record a seal of approval.
Adams has not been good, but for me he can redeem himself in the off season by firing Granato, hiring Brind'Amour (assuming Carolina doesn't), buying out Skinner, not bringing back Girgs, and trading a few prospects to fill our needs.
Staying the course would just be more acceptance of failure.
I do believe that we have enough pieces in place that all it would take is a good coach and smart GM.
Yeah, I know that is the prevailing opinion around here, I just don't agree. I don't care if no other team would agree with it, if I think things are going in the correct direction I don't give a you-know-what about what other teams would do.
As far as staying the course being acceptance of failure? Yeah, sounds good, but guess what, with the youngest team, staying the course almost LITERALLY means the team is getting better with age and experience.
-
1
-
1
-
4
-
1
-
-
I'm still fine with Adams and Granato starting next year. I haven't seen much in the past couple months to think a change makes things better right away.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
Thompson can be a 1C. Cozens can be a 2C. We need to get a whole lot better at 3C and 4C. They have the assets to add another 2C and push Cozens to 3C.
We have Krebs, Savoie, Kulich, Rosen, and Östlund in the system at various stages of readiness. Maybe a few of these keys are better wingers in NHL?
If Adams says once again that they want to win now than he needs to move some of them, or his #1 pick in 2024, for proven NHL talent and hopefully develop of few that remain.
It would appear they are thinking Krebs could take that 3c job...but since the Mitts trade, he is only averaging just over 12 minutes of ice time per game. Not exactly throwing him out there and waiting for him to take that spot. Only Robinson and Jost are getting less ice time than him (and even they are within a few seconds of Krebs).
I'm thinking/hoping Thompson is playing through a wrist injury that will be better next year. He had a 'career' year last year, but it wasn't just last year, he had a full year the season before where he was shooting at 15+ percent and scoring at a 40 goal pace. If he gets back to that 40+ goal guy they team is in pretty good shape, I just need to see it.
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
I think Dahlin is at the same level as Hughes. Last night showed it.
Dahlin is still growing/learning/getting better. BUT, I think his play gets better and he gets more recoginition if/when he is on a team that is doing a lot better. If the Sabres were to be a 100+ point team next year and fighting for a division title, he may very well get attention as one of the best in the league.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Second Line Center said:
I said to my wife she’s bigger than Michael Jackson. I think that’s the territory we’re in with her.
Bigger than peak Michael.
Interesting comparison. It might be true. I think Jackson had a slightly wider 'net' so to speak of fans. I'm not saying Taylor Swift doesn't have fans from all ages, demographics, genders, she does, and maybe she is bigger than Michael Jackson. My memory of him in the 1980's and early 90's was a slight bit more diversity (gender wise) in people who listened to his music.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:
Disagree. Byram filled a big need on the backend. It set up our D corps. Joker partnered with Power has helped Power a lot since the deal was made. The entire pace of play has changed since Bryan has come into the lineup which was desperately needed.
Finding a 2-3 C is easier to replace than a young top pairing D.
I can argue what is harder to find both ways. This team (Sabres) spent a LONG time trying to find top Centers...and while you can argue you did have 'decent' #2 or #3 guys, you haven't had a very good one through most of the last 15 years.
A top pair D-man, yeah, those are REALLY hard to find. But, you have one in Dahlin, I think you could say you might/should have one eventually in Power. Is Byram overkill in terms of top D-man, and what you might have to pay them when he is up for a new deal? Again, I could argue this either way.
Ultimately, I'm happy with the deal. Mostly because in a VERY small sample size, Bryam looks really good here. But also because I think Mitts is a 'good' #2 or #3 center, but I was not as high on him as many on this board and I think a player like Byram has a better chance of being a bigger difference-maker on this roster than Mitts did.
-
In just over 5 minutes, the Sabes have as many, or more goals than they did in 4 of the previous 5 games vs this team.
-
1
-
-
Zemgus keeping the puck on the boards to flip to Thompson on Tage's goal, and now in front of the net providing a distraction on Tuch's goal. He's not a long term solution on that line, but he's not dragging it down either.
-
1
-
-
Ok, beat this team already.
5 games vs them. 0-5 record. Only one of them was close, a 4-3 loss just over a year ago.
The rest were blow-outs (or at least borderline blowouts), most recently a 5-2 Loss in January, a 5-1 loss, a 7-4 loss, and another 5-2 loss.
So, 5 total games against them. 5 losses. 12 goals scored, 26 goals allowed. I just want to see them beat this team.
One positive note...the last 2 times they faced Seattle, they have outshot them 73-48 (but still lost those 2 games by a combined score of 9-5)
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Mr. Allen said:
Haha. Ok. Look, you’re obviously a Sabres guy trying to talk Bills. It’s why I typically don’t talk football on this hockey forum because of guys like you. But you clearly don’t pay attention or are a complete Diggs defender.
I’m not talking about him specifically asking for a trade. I’m talking about him being dramatic and a pain in the arse of the Buffalo Bills. I’m not going to get into every moment he’s had. There’s been plenty. Look them up yourself.
You should stick to hockey.Agree with you (partially) on Diggs. I'd be open to the team not losing much if he wasn't here.
But your take on members of this forum sticking to Hockey is way, WAY out of line. Many posters here follow the Bills just as much as the Sabres. Just because someone 'likes' hocky more or likes to 'talk' hockey more on this forum, doesn't mean their opinion should be invalidated or put down because its here vs 'over there'.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, MattPie said:
It's this sentence. Not hard to read that as negative to Buffalo.
Yeah, I really don't see that as negative. Different is different. Could be longer practices, could be different structure. different times. Different drills. When you were part of any coaching staff's practice for a few years, or any organization for as long as he is....I dont' know. I think the people reading that deeply into that line WANT to view it as negative to Granato.
-
49 minutes ago, ... said:
More shots at Meatballs' coaching?
"We wanted to get him in some games, get him a little bit comfortable. I think we practice a little differently here. There's just a lot of new for him here. So [we've been] discussing some of the new, some quickness that can come back into his game, some physicality that could come back into his game."
I know people just want to take shots at Granato if that is their/your agenda...but reading that article, can someone point out to me the part of it where he takes shots at Granto's coaching as opposed to just general comments that the team didn't make the playoffs in his tenure here? I don't see it.
-
1 hour ago, Doohickie said:
The only poster that drives me mad when they make simple spelling/grammatical errors is me. I hate having that "edited by" tag because I typed "lost" when I mean "loss" but I'd rather fix the typo than show what an ignorant lout I am.
That has happened to me with loss/lost also, and I have many posts with 'edited' on them for grammer/spelling errors.
I almost SWEAR sometimes there is some form of autocorrect going on though, because when I re-read my posts, the 'mistakes' I often find are not one-letter mistakes, but instead grammer mistakes that I swear I did not make.
-
1
-
-
This is a bad topic for me because when I post things, especially long posts, I find I make a lot of typos that I often have to go back and correct, and some I just miss.
If I had to pick one, it would be lose - loose. Not because mistakes don't happen, but I have seen posts from people (I THINK on Twitter) that the same person will make the one over and over that I think its intentional.
-
1
-
-
Its Dahlin for me right now. Bryam has such asmall sample size as other have said.
Lets see how he fits into this team, lets see what happens as he gets 22-24 minutes game after game after game. Maybe he will be great. He has been great in a very small sample size, but I also haven't really seen enough of him in his own end to know.
Dahlin has had some struggles early in the year, but I think he's already a top 20 D-man in this league. In the offensive end he may not be 'elite' at everything, but he is very good at almost everything...skating, shot accuracy, finding open guys, controlling the puck and making others miss him, avoiding hits. Defensively, he can be somewhat physical, scoops up loose pucks and controls them in the D-zone, often makes great exit passes/stretch passes. With a 'better' team around him and one or two less minutes per game, for an entire year, he's getting Norris consideration.
-
24 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:
Diggs' dead cap # for this season would be just over $31M.
There is no way the Bills can trade him.
Not sure, but doesn't that number go down quite a bit if they trade him after June 1?
-
25 minutes ago, Claude Balls said:
I honestly believe this team would already be in the playoffs if UPL was named the #1 goalie back in October. Thanks Adams.
It was only the first 6 games where he didn't play. Since game 7, he has started 39 of 67 games (almost 60 percent basically being the starter since then). And as far as those first 6 games, UPL wasn't playing well in the beginning of the year. Even after he was installed as the De-facto starter in late October getting the majority of the work, he had a GAA of 3.13 and save percentage of .892 through the end of the calendar year. Maybe he was battling a nagging injury, maybe the team in front of the Sabres goaltenders was playing awful Defense...but I don't think he would have made an appreciable difference in the standings if he played those first 6 games.
After he did take over, he played 7 of the next 9 games, winning 3, losing 4 and having a GAA of over 3 in those starts. He, and/or the team, wasn't playing well at the beginning of the year.
-
3
-
-
After 67 games, the Sabres have 69 points this season. Last year after 67 games, they had 72 points.
Last year starting at game 68, the Sabres went on a 3 game losing streak, losing those 3 games by a total score of 19-5.
IF the Sabres get 3 points in the next 3 games, they will have the exact same number of points after 70 game as they did last year (and actually be better in terms of tie-breakers due to more regulation wins)
Last season, the Sabres got 19 points in the final 12 games.
They are now also a positive in goal differential. The last time an eastern conference team finished with a positive goal differential and did NOT make the playoffs (pre-covid, traditional playoff format) was in the 2018-2019 season.
-
4
-
3
-
-
Clifton gets Lee off the ice, their 5th best scorer, I guess thats a good trade.
-
2
-
-
Alex Nylander, 6 goals in 10 games for Columbus after scoring again tonight.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:
I'm tellin' ya, I'm gravitating heavily towards Okposo bringing a Haitian Witch Doctor Curse from the Islanders with him.
Not to say it was Okposo's fault, but when he was with the Islanders, they weren't a really good team overall for the first part of his career. Also, the Islanders were not the 'play team defense and shut down the opponents' back then they way they are now. Basically, he NEVER was part of/learned a 2-way game with them, and he certainly didn't learn it with the Sabres.
-
For the season....
Period 1: Opponents outscore the Sabres 78-50
Period 2: Sabres outscore opponents 67-60
Period 3: Sabres outscore opponents 76-55
Either it is the fault of coaches they start so slow because they don't have the team ready...or it is credit to the coaches for making adjustments as the game goes on to make them better at the end.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Mango said:
They’re 16-11-1 since Jan 1. That’s good for 16th in the league and 9th in the conference.
So if by “top team” you mean “average” then you nailed it! There was that 3 game win streak in there. So I get how thag could skew some things.
I agree with you that is not really a 'top team'. But that is almost a 97 point pace, so 'good' at least, and the thing that makes it feel better is, they have been in just about every single game. Of their 11 losses, I would say most were either 1 goal losses or 2/3 goal losses due to empty net goals. I think there really have maybe been only 3 or 4 of those 28 games that they lost 'cleanly', in contrast to the beginning of the year where they would have 'clean losses' 3 or 4 times a month at least.
-
1
-
Everything Kevyn Adams has done as Sabres GM
in The Aud Club
Posted · Edited by mjd1001
So you are the judge on objectivity?
I think this D-unit is highly talented but the youngest in the league by far and I feel they will get better with more expereience.
I think Tage is going to bounce back next year, he hurt his wrist, and Matthews had a similar injury and has his production drop about 30% the year he played through it.
Since the beginning of the year, it is obvious to me the team is playing a different style in their own zone, in over 30 games they have a winning record and even in their losses, 90% of them have been close.
So you may not agree with me, but to say that I dont' have any objectivity at all? That is YOU not being objective. Seeing the team is playing better over the course of almost a half season is being objective. Understanding that a Defensive group who's top 4 is by far the youngest and most inexpereienced in the league and realizing that is being objective. Saying "enough is enough" and just being negative and wanting coahes and GM's fired because you ran out of patience? Not objective, that is more of an "Agenda". I refuse at this point to be that way.
Next December, if they are still floundering out of the playoffs, sure I will likely be there then, but not now. I'm choosing to be 'objective' in that I realize the only way to improve is not changing who the players and coaches are, but to understand your existing players and coaches can improve.