Thorny

So he’s found a way to seamlessly replace Eichel on the PP while also managing to avoid contributing points there so as to not pad his stats. Never mind lacking hockey sense, he’s a genius

Re: Bergeron. Why do I care about “most hockey observers.”. Link? The analysts worth their weight in that regard recognize Bergeron’s greatness. I don’t care where he falls on the “top 10” any given year. Perennial selke contender. Team Canada Olympic team staple. What centres have we had you’d take over him? He’s not just a superstar, he’s an all time talent He’s going to the Hall of Fame, I’m pretty sure he’s a true 1C. Here’s a link from 8 months ago detailing how his peers selected him as the 7th best C in the NHL, at the age of 35. Just behind Jack Eichel at 6, actually. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/nesn.com/2021/04/where-nhl-players-coaches-rank-patrice-bergeron-among-best-centers/amp/

48 regular season games. The Sabres weren’t lights out that whole season - they strengthened as it went on. When we think of that team we think of the one down the stretch and, especially, into the playoffs. Briere was there for all of it. And, 95 points in 07. Clearly he had become more than a “pretty good 2C” and to claim otherwise would be mistaken. Again, we don’t need to jump from “2C” to “superstar”. There is plenty of room for “true 1C” in between

We need to stop referencing 06 without mentioning that Briere paced for more points that season than Eichel EVER has. I don't even care what people adjudge Briere to be overall, that TEAM can't be the target if we don't acknowledge that TEAM (and 07) had an over a point a game C those years. That wasn't just a squad with 4 "pretty good 2Cs". Re: Boston - we can't just look at points. Bergeron is an ELITE player.

He has 2 power play points this season - he's not acquitting himself "pretty well" in Eichel's spot on the PP. The Sabres can certainly try the depth of C route, but they still need to add another other this draft, then. We still need more high-ceiling bullets than we have.

This kinda gets to my point about going 3 drafts without drafting a C in the first or second round. I don't really think we'll see it - it's too big of a development gap

Isn't there kind of a middle ground though? Briere was a point a game guy. That's a true 1C. Doesn't have to be a #1 overall type franchise guy, just a bonafide #1 centre. There's a chance the offensive ceiling ISN'T high enough on Cozens, Krebs, and Mittelstadt to be that guy. If the two guys we had were only borderline 1Cs, we need two of these guys to develop into PRETTY GREAT 2Cs haha Just don't think it necessarily needs to be Wright.

But ya, I said that's what I was arguing. I've mentioned a bunch that a big part of the allure of Krebs is it's another legit bullet in the group that can realistically produce top 6 Cs, and hopefully even a 1C. Of course I'm not vanishing Cozens or Mittelstadt into thin air, I'm saying it's quite likely only 1 of the two amounts to being a top 6 C, what I'd want from a top 6 C, just playing the odds. Whether that's because Casey ends up a better 3rd scoring Line C or because Cozens shifts to W, who knows. But I wouldn't bet right now on Cozens and Mittelstadt together, as a combo, locking down a true 1C and 2C role, would you? Actually asking. Krebs represents another shot at that. He was a really good add. When I say it's barren after Krebs in the system, it mostly about, ya, there's no one else there that has the potential to join that group - but in making that point, it also strikes me that there aren't very many even NHL projectible centres in that group. After, Bloom, I suppose? That problem is much easier to fix, that's true, we can add Cs that have NHL ceilings (not that we've done it in 2 drafts). But yes, I do think we need one more guy after Krebs, and for that I hope we use a higher pick. I can't imagine going 3 years without picking a C top 2 rounds is something we've seen very often - I don't know enough about drafting to claim I know more than the people who have decided that shouldn't happen. I don't think the Sabres are organizationally barren at C, at all. I said from the beginning I mean, "after Krebs - in system". Just look at the rankings - it's all W, G, D

You don't think there's any element of, "oh, that was those guys. not my guys."?

We are most in need compared to most rosters - our on-roster guys are also question marks. Unlike, say, a Boston. As I said, "barren" was particularly relevant when looking at just the system, guys not in the NHL. Apologies if there is confusion but when I use "system" it's usually in that way. After Krebs, it IS barren - this is because we haven't used high picks on centres the last couple drafts. There's absolutely no way I'll be convinced a team can go 3 straight years without doing do and get away it, not with the current roster we have. Josh Bloom has a glimmer of hope to be an NHLer. Look at the numbers beside the rest of those guys. They aren't going to play in the NHL. My conclusion stands for me: after Krebs, we don't have anyone else in the system who projects to NHL player at C. You are lumping together on roster players already in key roles for us and guys still in the system, and comparing our pools against other teams, without factoring in their NHL players in key roles. It's imbalanced an gives an inaccurate representation. If Cozens and Casey are in the NHL, yes, the prospect system at C is barren after Krebs. If Cozens is still a prospect, our prospect system at C is still too shallow considering what we need to fill on the NHL roster. There *is* a reason we aren't factoring higher on lists, and it's not our winger, D, and G depth. And it's not all "anti-buffalo bias" either. - - - All you have to do is look at organizational depth. Cozens and Mittelstadt are also already our *best* centres. Compare Cozens, Thompson, Casey, and Krebs against the league as a whole and...we need to take a C. Up high.

I just hope his plan took account for (what, potentially) a lot of losing over the course of a season might mean for the wattage of the blinding lights already here present.

I've made this argument before but i believe he'd draw a distinction between "tanking" and "prioritization". There isn't going to be anything of the "future" sacrificed for right now. A great example is Ullmark. It's not that Adams was against signing Ullmark on it's face, indeed he did attempt to sign him, just that it had to be by very specific terms. Expecting any goalie to agree to the "buffalo terms" would be dicey at best considering where we are at right now, but Ullmark was at least feasible in that sense due to, team loyalty I guess. Adams isn't TRYING to lose, I don't think, if I had to guess, he merely accepts losing likely based on the utmost prioritizations he's set. A goalie COULD have been had, but that wasn't according to plan.

jedi

Agree. To me that's all the more reason to upgrade

It reminds me a little of the "botterill couldn't get a 2C" discussion, except we weren't sitting around saying "we have some coming in the system, don't worry"

That's what I want! Winning is happiness. I don't need Stanley. Also the mere fact you question the type of person you are proves you aren't a ***** person. Shouldn't say stuff like that.

I almost missed this gem. Please tag next time

Isn't Wright more of a playmaker than Savoie? (In addition to being better all around). I lean that way stylistically as that's not really Cozens, who's more balanced, and Thompson is clearly a shoot-first C. There's Casey, but between Wright and Savoie I'd personally prefer the more traditional type C. I could be wrong on Wright and Savoie though honestly, I haven't delved into the draft that much so correct me if I am wrong

Without rounding out his game (5 assists) I don't see him having a (centre) ceiling much above 3rd scoring line C on a good team, but that he's even imo credibly in that position is a testament to his development

I'm not sure there's any question "expectation" is proving to be the biggest factor in terms of the perception of, well, almost everything We are free of the expectation of what a franchise, generational centre should mean for our ability to win games. Dahlin can be our best defenceman yet only a footnote in most GDTs because he's expected to be Potvin

Probably. I guess? That wasn't me though. I enjoyed the wins and I think the losses suck. Nothing has really changed for me. I wasn't one who ever bought into the "entertaining losses" thing, there's no flip flop here

I think people tend to underrate how barren we are at C in the system, the most important position. Especially on lists that focus purely on guys not yet in the NHL. Before Krebs, we may not have had a C in the system that projected to NHL level. We haven't drafted a C in at least the first 2 rounds the last 2 drafts. I keep saying we gotta get a C high this coming draft and the refrain is "BPA" No, we need to take a couple centres. IMO After that, as I've said the pool looks pretty strong there's depth, but not at the most important skater position

Also, the connotation of "number 1 c" isn't casey Mittelstadt. Relative to the rest of the Cs on the roster he's pretty close. And that's not because the rest are pushing 1C. Same goes for Jokiharju and #2. Counting Anderson as a 1 as if it was logical to expect he wouldn't burn out/get injured at his age is absurd. I forgot that all the teams we've been playing have been totally healthy. Tuch is fair game.

The franchise has done a masterful job resetting public expectations. Not finding enjoyment in losing 9 games out of 11 is an outlier opinion. They expectation is literally "try". As if the teams of the past did not. My opinion is that everyone's mileage mage vary on that. The organization telling me to not care if the crest wins isn't going to make me not care that the crest isn't winning. I've fallen for that before. Not doing it again.

I get that - but goaltending is also a portion of the roster, last I checked. There are posters saying it’s “really hard” to find good goaltending so we can’t fault Adams, and also some saying we are just waiting 3/4 years for Levi. If either of those avenues represent necessary components in improving from a sub .500 team, im not altogether reassured. Neither seem particularly appealing. If it’s so hard to get goaltending, how can I be confident it’s coming? If it’s so hard we need to develop our own, we are waiting multiple years for a “maybe”. And it’s not like GT is the only area of need.