Curt
-
Posts
8,714 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Curt
-
-
8 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Honestly? I just wanted to post that gif again
Don’t disagree with the bold
It is as worth it.
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
That's not wrong, but I guess my problem is ending up with a tight cap number BEFORE we've even gotten any good. What then? There's an assumption we will be a "decent team" and I'm still waiting to see that. We're right where we always are right now, near bottom. I'd suggest the mix of "star scorers" (for lack of a better description) and hard working muckers is a little off.
Skinner off the books and a rising cap might make it all okay, but that's a ways down the road and a lot can happen before then. I just hate to make assumptions of success before they happen on the ice. We already went through that with Eichel and Reinhart.
To the last bolded point, yes, maybe. If the mix of players in terms of style and what they bring is wrong there is nothing wrong with trading a scoring forward for checkers and PK guys or a tough D man or a solid goalie etc etc. It's not that I hate Mitts. He's improved a lot. But $7 million for your 3C (if that's what he is) seems wrong.
Forgive me if I overstep by picking at your inner feelings, but I don’t think it’s really the 1st bolded that bothers you. Both Ottawa and Detroit spent to the cap before they were any good and you liked it.
I think it’s actually the second bolded that bothers you. You want more hard nosed players. That’s fine, I don’t entirely disagree. I do think it can be done by bringing in a couple more Greenway/Clifton/E Johnson type of additions though. Guys who are affordable and fill a role.
I don’t really ASSUME that they will be a great team, but that’s the hope, right. That’s what we plan for. If it doesn’t happen for this group, the group will get blown up at some point. These guys don’t have NTCs. So if they fail and the group changes significantly, then any cap projections are out the window. I can only project based upon what is here now.
If it makes you feel any better, the Sabres shouldn’t be tight to the cap next season either, based on the players who are currently in the organization. If they are, it will be because they spent $8M+ on players coming in from the outside.
-
37 minutes ago, ... said:
The entire Dadonov thing is ridiculous. If Cap Friendly has NMC details for individual players surely Vegas has to share some negligence somehow in that trade.
Capfriendly didn’t have Dadonov’s NTC. They usually get all the contract details, but not always. It was Ottawa’s responsibility to inform Vegas, and they negligently did not.
-
4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
That's debatable and probably a whole other topic. They just put a lot of money into their D, they have Skinner, Cozens, Thompson costing a fair amount together. There's good value in Cozens and Thompson if they put up top line numbers but that total is still a fair amount, so if you now give Mitts Cozens money (and term I would assume goes with that) you're going to be in trouble when Quinn and Peterka and Levi or whoever want/earn new deals. So yes, you can pay Mitts that for a few years but that window will be really small on a team that hasn't even started winning yet. The 4th line money will have to be minimal.
1) The cap margins will be small, because they eventually are for any decent team.
2) By the time Quinn, Peterka, Levi, or anyone younger than that really need to be paid, not only will the cap be more than $10M higher, but Skinner will also be off the books. It will be possible to have like 4-5 other players on $6M+ long term contracts, in addition to Thompson, Cozens, Dahlin, and Power.
3) Yup, the 4th line money will probably have to be minimal, but that’s true of pretty much any team that’s been decent for a while.
It’s a choice, just like anything else. If you give Mitts a $7M 6 yr contract, yeah, maybe (MAYBE) that forces you to trade someone 4-5 years from now, but if Mitts is worth it, then I just don’t care. Any team that has too many good players comes to points like that. If the Sabres get good, that’s an inevitability.
What’s the alternative? Trade away your good players before they need to get paid because of a hypothetical cap crunch 4-5 years down the road?
-
2
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
Cozens money for Mitts will make Mitts unaffordable for the long term cap situation but it might happen.
So yes, the 4th line will have to be CHEAP like most teams. Most teams go for tough guys partly because they play for less. It at least gives your bottom line a purpose and identity. Krebs imo fits between 2 tough guys or grit guys because of his style and attitude, but he'd have to be signed cheap as well. Ultimately, the 4th line likely becomes a revolving door and isn't a huge issue.
It’s not true. The money could still work long term.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:
Could cozens not fulfil the Drury role in due time?
Maybe, but he doesn’t right now.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, pi2000 said:
Yeah I get the conspiracy theories around those 2, but really it would've been best for their long term development if they were both back in junior playing 25min a game in all situations.
KA needs to show a little more patience with these young prospects, hopefully this doesn't stunt their development.
I say this in good faith, but….prove it.
If the best way for Benson to get better is to get stronger, then is it more beneficial for him to play 25 mins per game against junior players, or to spend a lot of extra time working out and also practicing and training with pro players and trainers?
I don’t think the answer is obviously that it’s better for him to be in juniors.
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, pi2000 said:
This will set him back I'm afraid.
This is what happens when you thrust an undersized 18yo into your lineup before he's physically ready.
What wouldve been best for him is to play a full season as the top dog on his junior team, learn how to lead and continue to build confidence while filling out physically.
Now he's forced to miss time in what is a crucial development year for him, smh.
I think it’s all a farce honestly. This trial run and “injury” will allow him to hang around the NHL team receiving pro instruction and working out like mad to build much needed strength. Then he maybe does a couple games AHL rehab stint, goes to WJCs and then maybe to juniors.
Isnt it kind of suspicious that Savoie and Benson are basically taking turns being “injured” and the timelines for both line up perfectly?
-
4
-
2
-
-
27 minutes ago, French Collection said:
I think KA is concerned with the Wenatchee situation in the WHL.
I don’t get why people are so concerned about “the Wenatchee situation”. What’s the situation exactly? Everything there should be pretty normal now, no?
-
2 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:
Their top penalty killers seem to be Thompson and Greenway. Plus I think they need to add 1 more winger who can play the defensive/ checking role but can provide more offence than say girgensons.
I’ll have to look this up but who was the 4th line on the 2005 Sabres ?I’m not talking about the penalty kill though……..
2005 4C was Gaustad. The wingers were not that consistent. None of the lines were particularly consistent. Ruff shifted guys a lot. They also had Drury who would do a lot of that heavy lifting defensively.
-
2 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:
Say there is no “4th line” in their future
just roll 4 solid skilled lines.
is there anything wrong with a future Centre spine of
Thompson
Cozens
Mittlestadt
Kulich????
you then have plug them in with
Tuch Greenway
JJP. Quinn
Rosen. Savoie
Benson. xx
the last winger would be someone in the Greenway / Tuch mold
big , Fast, veteran who doesn’t mind throwing their weight around and is defensively responsible But has more offensive upside than Girgs
krebs, Girgs and Jost can battle to be the 13th forward if they are still around
In my opinion, this isn’t really feasible at a high level. You kind of need a lock down defensive line that you can send out for a key shift in the defensive zone, or to take extra shifts when protecting a lead. It doesn’t need to be numbered a 4th line, but you need one that can fill the role. I don’t see anything’s like that listed above.
Also, it’s generally not maintainable from a financial standpoint.
-
2
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Buffalonill said:
Both the NHL and NFL need to get with Reality you can hit women, go over speed limit by 50 etc get nothing .
But gambling you toss the book its embarrassing
It’s not a sin tax. The rules against gambling aren’t in place because the NHL/NFL think gambling is immoral.
It’s to protect the product. In some circumstances, gambling could lead to situations where a player could be tempted to influence the game for gambling gains. That’s what the organizations are trying to eliminate.
-
17 hours ago, Buffalonill said:
Because he gambled? Probably the dumbest s*** ever.
Plus it wasn't even his sport.
They maybe were holding off on signing him because they knew he had a potentially long suspension coming his way.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, dudacek said:
Here’s a bonus to “wasting” a year: sometimes you get to sign a player to his 2nd contract before he breaks out which can save you good money. Casey Mittelstadt is a good example.
People put way too much emphasis on this. It’s a secondary consideration, not a big deal.
Was going to say the exact same thing. The issue should be whether he can play. It’s not entirely clear which scenario works out better financially.
-
3
-
-
On 10/23/2023 at 12:18 PM, Buffalonill said:
Kids with these sayings nowadays
Kid came up selling candy at my door and he said "ok bet" when I was getting money.
5 hours ago, Buffalonill said:I'm sorry but I've never heard of this.
Is society really this screwed up that you can't say thank you anymore?
This phrase has been around for some years, but I would say it’s not that widely used.
I think the kid actually used it incorrectly. It’s an acknowledgment of agreement with something. It’s like an abbreviation of the phrase “ you bet”.
”Hey, you want to go see if that old grouchy guy down the street will buy some candy?”
”Bet” (You bet) (You bet I do)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:
Not saying you stop him, but if you have a team that can and will dish it out you gain respect (and maybe a little fear from some) and thus you have less liberties taken against you. It won't stop him but it can hobble him and take him out of being an issue.
Not what I'm suggesting at all, but you keep turning the other cheek and see how that goes.
I say if a player does some BS, the guys on the ice handle it immediately.
I don’t really want guys to spend half a game going out of their way to deliver extra hits. That’s playing right into his hands.
-
1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:
The way hockey used to be back when there were never any cheap shots?
In all my years watching hockey, there has never been a time where being physical with a player like Tkachuk, stopped said player from being a cheap shot artist. Now, if your argument is that at some point a good team needs to be able to “fight fire with fire”, I can accept that. But players like Brady Tkachuk won’t stop being who they are because they took a few heavy body checks. Indeed, that’s the sort of thing that encourages them.
In fact I’d argue that is exactly what they want. A player like that wants you to jump over to boards thinking “I’m gonna get that guy” instead of focusing playing good hockey.
-
1
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I’m speaking towards his modus operandi as a whole
which I think it’s very relevant because he appears to be exceptionally regimented
Ive posted about this recently, I have a high opinion on his skills as an evaluator, drafter, negotiator, most nouns: my suspicion is he’s a terrible strategist - at least relative to the strategy id employ
ymmv
Yes, I don’t disagree. I’ve pushed back in years past against people saying we need to make trades or bring in high priced FAs in order to make the playoffs NOW.
This offseason was my personal inflection point. I would have like a better defenseman, as the additions were acceptable, but barely. And I am not comfortable with the goalie situation at all.
The current emergence of Benson as someone who will almost certainly be another useful player and possible star, in a couple years if not right now, makes we even more comfortable with the idea of trading a couple prospects.
I expect Adams to be on the lookout for in season additions, like Greenway last season. I’ll give him this season. If they don’t make the playoffs, I’ll be disappointed, and I expect serious upgrades before the 2024-25 season. If none materialize I’m going to go sharpen a pitchfork.
-
1
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I am absolutely worried this is exactly how KA thinks
a refusal to lose a battle to win the war
imo, it’s stinky strategy
While I understand what you are saying……
In the context of this specific discussion, I don’t like Hanifin. I’m a little concerned about the fit, as another LHD, and I’m also concerned that he is not that good.
I have major concerns that he is an average #4 D who is going to require a contract far in excess of what he provides.
-
1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:
Oh I know we'll need to make a trade; its more of a matter of getting something of equal value that concerns me.
Yeah, I’m not sure if Hanifin is who I would go for either.
For me it’s not a bad idea because it’s shortsighted, it’s probably a bad idea because Hanifin isn’t particularly good or a great fit.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, thewookie1 said:
Then what though; I don't want to trade everything for a single shot at the playoffs
Currently the Sabres actually have too many forward prospects. There aren’t enough spots to give them all NHL shots. Especially at the roles that they project to fill. They will need to move some of them in the next 1-2 years.
What would be your plan for that?
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:
Makar is undoubtedly a superstar, just beat Bobby Ore’s record for being the fastest defenseman in NHL history to 250 points.
One note that kind of adds some perspective to this. Orr’s first 250 games were when he was ages 18-21. Makar’s were when he was 21-24. Big difference there.
-
2
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, BearWithME said:
I don't know if I've watched enough hockey to state this as an opinion, so I'll ask it as a question: is Levi the right goalie for this team right now, with how they seem to want to play?
Watching them it seems like they're built around pushing the action--last night they were the best they've looked this year, and it reminded me of last spring. Their scoring spree in the second was predicated on just constantly getting down ice and throwing shots at net. I guess every team does that to some extent, but it seems like it results in scenarios where--when it breaks down--the opponents end up with some sphincter-clenching shots on our net because we've been caught unawares. And those seem to be literally the worst possible shot for Levi to block, which then end up doubly hurting us as balloon poppers, and our young, aggressive team suddenly looks timid and defensive, and no longer pushes the action.
There were 2 or 3 shots last night where I thought to myself, Levi would have let that by.
Maybe I'm seeing it wrong.
Goalies are weird. Sometimes they just play really well. Last night the whole team played really well. I’d say that if Comrie keeps playing well, keep giving him opportunities. A month from now it could easily be Levi who is playing better. Sabres just need to ride the hot hand.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Zamboni said:
What was the attendance tonight vs. the isles? It looked like 14,000.
ESPN box score says 16,179.
-
1
-
1
-
Jost, Krebs and the Bottom 6 Problem!
in The Aud Club
Posted
This is all perfectly reasonable. I don’t really disagree.
My points were were mostly just weighing in on whether the Sabres could afford to pay Mitts long term. They can, but you could definitely be right that it’s not the ideal roster mix.
One other thing I’ll say regarding this is that the Sabres may view Cozens as someone who can do some of this shutdown C type role in the future. I think he has the physicality and mindset to do it. He definitely isn’t there yet though. How much of that is a conscious game plan decision to play a transition offense game as opposed to a defense focused game, I’m not sure.