Curt
-
Posts
8,714 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Curt
-
-
3 hours ago, eman said:
See you at US Thanksgiving! Hope they're in a playoff spot. I watch a lot of sports and if you claim to also, you are blinded by dismissing that stat. Enjoy!
You mean real Thanksgiving?
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, rickshaw said:
How does Okposo get the 4th most ice time against Pittsburgh for our fwds? That to me is absolutely ridiculous.
That didn’t happen. Go double check that.
-
20 minutes ago, Brawndo said:
Knoblauch has been considered a good up and coming NHL HC candidate for a few years now. Championships in the WHL and OHL, NHL assistant coach, and AHL HC experience. A lot of experience for a guy who is only 45.
-
6 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:
McDavid has way too much power it’s Ridiculous.
Why would you think that this is his doing? -
40 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
Fair point. (Not intentional by me -- I think the moneypuck page I saw didn't specify 5 v 5 as opposed to all situations).
Most sites default to the all situations data. I catch myself looking at the wrong stuff on occasion. Just something to look out for.
-
1
-
-
On 11/10/2023 at 1:40 PM, nfreeman said:
Separately -- let's say, just for poops and giggles, that Kane is all the way back. The season before last, he had 92 pts in 78 games -- for a 68-pt Blackhawks team. And his fancystats were good too -- 54.5% XG% and 56% FF%. Who here doesn't want that guy on the Sabres PP, which is really freaking bad right now? Or getting 5-on-5 minutes over, say, Krebs, VO, KO, Zemgus, etc.?
It all depends on his physical condition.
When you site possession stats like FF%, you really should use the 5-on-5 numbers as opposed to the all situations numbers that you sited. The inclusion of a bunch of PP time (or PK time in the case of different players) skews the numbers a lot.
Kane’s possession numbers were still pretty good that season, around 50%, which was about 6% better than the team’s average.
-
Dude, it was the second game of a back to back, on the road. They call that a scheduled loss for a reason.
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, SHAAAUGHT!!! said:
I think a good GM builds some level of flexibility into his lineup. You can’t do that if you have 8 guys in the core where they are all making 7-10MM+.
Well, Sabres wouldn’t have 8, they would have 6. I don’t think we need to exaggerate. If they are all worth (or more than worth) the money, then why not? You can afford what you can afford. If they are good contracts, then you can move them if/when you need to. You don’t need to preemptively jettison good players because maybe some day you will have cap trouble.
I guess my real question is, what is core even? What is the definition of the core of a hockey team?
-
1
-
1
-
-
56 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
Misalignment = dislocated. Immediately afterwards = they popped it back in.
Yeah, maybe. But like I said, the reason that I didn’t go out of my way to bring it up is because my whole point was that it pull ups do not matter at all.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, SHAAAUGHT!!! said:
I’ve been thinking about this contract a lot lately. Sabres have their core, but Casey is a nice Core+1. So what does a Core+1 get paid? I’m thinking less term, less money than the core, but enough money to keep him feeling good about his situation, but also low enough to make him easy to trade, while giving him a chance to sing another 6-7 year deal when that one expires. Im coming in around 4x6.5 with no special clauses.
1) Why isn’t Mittelstadt part of the core? He could be.
2) There really is no such thing as a core. You keep the good players that you can. Sometimes you have to make hard decisions.
-
1
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
I'm not disagreeing with this but once you add one more top paid player to that we get in their situation. So yes, we get one more top player than the Leafs in our top core, and that makes a difference, but it still ends up being a lot of money that so far has not brought dividends. The bottom end of the roster sucks.
Everything with the Sabres is still in an optimists projection era where there is an expectation that they simply HAVE to be good, how can they not be with so many prospects, but so far they are not.
I simply feel that this treasure chest of prospects philosophy makes us as fans keep waiting on that future and if and when that future gets here the window of opportunity will slam shut on us because of it. I'd prefer if we NOW used some of that prospect capital as assets, made a deal or two and (as much as you can) assured success now.
So before anyone screams that's Terry Murray, it's not. This is a completely different time and situation.
Honestly not understanding some of your points.
You are now saying: We can afford more good players than the Leafs because our contract situations are better? Yeah, that was my whole point.
The additional stuff you say about those additional good players in addition to the top 5, still ending up costing a lot of money…….yeah, good players are going to cost money, and all the cap space is going to get used up. That’s what happens. All the money gets spent. That’s what we want.
You also keep saying this line about everyone being an optimistic and assuming that the team will be good. That means absolute nothing. It’s not an actionable sentiment. I want the Sabres to make good decisions that will give them the best chance of being good. If it doesn’t work out, then the cap hits don’t really matter much. I certainly don’t want them to not spend money because there is a possibility that they might not end up being good. Spend when it makes sense. The chips will fall where they will.
I agree with you about making a couple trades to bring in help nowish/soon. I think they need to do something before next season.
It was Tim Murray, and I actually think that because of the amount of talent that has developed on the NHL, most people are beyond that thinking of worrying about Tim Murraying it.
-
1 hour ago, Doohickie said:
HE HAD A PARTIALLY DISLOCATED SHOULDER WHEN HE COULDN'T DO A SINGLE PULLUP. Does no one remember that?
I do remember that story. I don’t remember it specifically being a partially dislocated shoulder though.
I recall a story after the fact that the staff at Minnesota recognized a misalignment of some sort affecting his shoulder that they were able to correct, then he was able to do several pull-up immediately afterwards.
To be honest, the story always reeked of damage control to me, but who knows.
The real reason that I didn’t mention it though was because I don’t care at all whether a hockey player is good at pullups. It’s irrelevant.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, elijah said:
Off topic from Mitts himself, but the amount of discussion around pull-ups in that thread and the assumption that they’re easy is a sure sign of a lot of people that have never actually attempted a pull-up
I’m not a professional athlete by any means but I’m mid 20’s, workout 5 days of the week weight lifting, weigh about 205, bench 235 and row 185, played sports all my life — I can only do 8 pull ups on a good day.
Was he at the biggest interview for future professional athletes and maybe lacked some preparation? Sure. But let’s not sit behind a computer screen and keyboard and act like pull-ups are some exceptionally easy task when they’re actually pretty difficult and require a good bit of strength that a 160 pound 17 year old might not have. I don’t know why that irked me so bad but it did lol
As far as Mitts, it feels like the asking price goes up with every game. If the intent is to sign him and have him as part of the core, KA has to get it done sooner than later. It seems like he’s played himself into the Tage/Cozens contract range, but if KA waits all season before resigning him he may play himself well past that range into an area that doesn’t seem feasible for our long term plans
Regarding pull ups specifically. I bet if Mitts had weighed 160 back then he would have been able to do more. I think he was like 190+ even at 17. He was always pretty thick in the lower half, which is exactly what you want for hockey. Pull up ability depends even more on your weight, especially lower body weight, than strength.
In my early-mid 20’s I didn’t work out that much but I could still consistently do 15+ pullups. I used to 20+ at my peak. It wasn’t because I was exceptionally strong. I wasn’t. It was because I didn’t weigh anything. I was like 5’11” 155. I guarantee that 17 year old Casey who couldn’t do a pull up was way stronger than 22 year me who could do 20. Pull ups just aren’t very relevant to hockey.
-
9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
That's the problem though right. Half the cap on 5 guys is Toronto's problem. Their bottom end is garbage. We'd end up the same only in our case 2 D and 3 forwards rather than 4 forwards and 1 D. Same problem though. Unless you cap cheat like Tampa and Vegas did it's a formula that doesn't work.
The window provided by the ELCs will be short and unsustainable when we need it the most. I can see us having cap trouble right around the same time we might become a legit cup contender and that could derail the whole thing. Again, I'm thinking ahead.
I think about the cap as much as anyone, but you are honest way overstating this as an issue.
Having their top 5 players locked up at around $40M for the next several years is a good cap position. It’s not an abnormally large amount. It’s difficult to find a good team this year that has their top 5 for less than 40 (there are a couple, but not many). A few years from now that $40M for a top 5 would actually be an asset, not a hindrance.
It has been an issue for Toronto the past few years, but do you know what they have actually been paying their guys? Their top 5 has been making $48M for the past few years. Compare that to what the Sabres are looking at. ~$40M for the next several years as the cap rises sharply. The two situations really are not in the same ballpark.
Before you continue to repeat this position over and over, please look closely at the cap #s of other team’s top 5. Go look at all the good teams. How many of them actually have their top 5 for less than $40M? How many of them project to maintain that for the next several years?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:
Well yes, arbitration is the most likely route.
I just kind of see the possible impasse along these lines. Last year if he was mapping out the Sabres over time KA probably thought I have my 1C (Thompson) locked up on a good long term deal so I'm locking up my 2C with similar term (Cozens) and then if he grows into it Mitts can be my 3C and with that thinking he's probably projecting 4-5 million but since, Mitts has been arguably the best center, definitely second best and now the math goes out the window.
idk, we will see what happens. It's all guess work at this point. Partly depends on how much Mitts wants to stay a Sabre. Again, just guess work.
Personally, I say sign him. He doesn’t need to be an overpaid 3C. He (or Cozens) can play on the wing when it makes sense. It doesn’t destroy the salary structure if he signs a contract that matches Thompson and Cozens’.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
Ya, unless he decides to hold out. Sabres get Nylandered. I can see it happening.
I’m not sure why it would be any more likely the happen with Mitts than any other soon to be RFA. In fact the situations are pretty dissimilar and I think it’s pretty unlikely that holding out would ever make sense for Mittelstadt.
If Mitts really just wanted to maximize his income, he would either sign a 2 year deal, or force arbitration and get himself to UFA. He isn’t going to go through all the circus of holding out when he has other options.
Thats the main way the situation differs from the Nylander situation. Nylander was only 22-23 with 2.5 NHL seasons under his belt when he held out. He wasn’t arbitration eligible.
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Happy Days said:
I’m thinking about getting the bentkey streaming app for my kids. Does anyone have it? What are your thoughts so far?
I saw that this was released and was intrigued. My kids aren’t quite old enough yet to get something like this, but I’d be interested in what anyone has to say about it.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Taro T said:
It was either recall today or send him back to Junior. Couldn't see them sending him back to junior at this point.
Wonder what Biro's injury is?
Biro’s injury? Got to be either a case of broken heart or butt hurt.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, inkman said:
Let’s trade for other team’s best players szn started early this year
It’s simultaneously “let’s trade for other team’s best players” season, and “we don’t have room for other team’s best players“ season. A rare time indeed.
-
2
-
-
35 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Good to see this guy find his feet. Sky’s the limit
Yeah, always liked him as a draft prospect. Glad that he looks to have recovered from a very scary Covid illness.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I like the idea of making a trade for a proven really good player, but he really does match the profile of a player type that the Sabres already have excess of. He is also on the books at a high number for 5 years after this season. So, while I like the general idea, I don’t think he is the right target for this team.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Why is their 7th D to start the season someone they are afraid of playing
Because, they think it’s better for R Johnson to play games in Rochester until needed versus sitting on the bench in Buffalo? Just guessing.
-
2
-
-
Trump tapped into a certain type of charismatic populism that drew in people who were looking for something different,
Vivek seems like he is trying to ride that same wave, but Trump has such a grip on his base that Vivek isn’t going to gain a foothold. At least not anytime soon.
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
37
Same
-
1
-
It Is Time: Fire the GM, the Coaching Staff, get some experience in here. Fans deserve better!!!
in The Aud Club
Posted
Yeah, the original one, that one. 😉