Marvin

"Wow, this is ugly now. Glad the kids are in bed." --- Rick Jeanneret

Another point to think about: Given what people on other fanboards (e.g., hfboards) are posting the players whom their teams will protect, Seattle may put a premium on getting centres: there appear to be many good defencemen being expost and many of the 7th forwards being protected are the team's #3C. Which of our forwards, who are likely to be exposed, qualify as NHL centres? Is there a good reason to pick that centre over Miller?

Let's alter our point of view slightly. What do you do if they want a quality depth player such as Bjork in order to take Miller? What is the maximum you would offer Seattle in picks to take Miller? How do these answers change if you expose Ristolainen versus Borgen. That would inform my decision more than other things.

dis udder.

20 April calls for 3:30 of "I Am the Walrus"? On the other hand, this is me:

We have too many centres who are too good next year, so we should trade Eichel? This is right up there with the time Capitol Records releases "Ticket to Ride" as a song from the movie "Eight Arms to Hold You". Why don't we see how the offseason shakes out first and then what injuries mar training camp before we go trading Eichel or Reinhart. I could stand rolling 4 lines and 3 pairs every game. Let's figure out the goaltending, coaching, assistants to the GM, scouts, etc. before getting so far ahead of ourselves. If next year's training camp comes and we go 5 lines, 4 pairs, and 3 goaltenders deep (cf. 2005-6), then let us thank our lucky stars and live with it.

I personally had given up.

We should take into account that we are playing a much tougher schedule now than then. Moreover, we were extremely conservative and passive under XHCRK. Thus, it would not surprise me if our defencive metrics are somewhat worse under HCDG even when we equalise for schedule. Moreover, early in the year, an absurd amount of the Sabres shots and goals came on power plays; those _should_ be more dangerous on average. Now, virtually all the scoring is at even strength. One point that gets lost in the statistics (being a numbers guy myself) is that the Sabres are much more aggressive in the offencive zone. IMHO, they are getting more shots when the goalie isn't fully set, when the defenders are out of position, from screens, from rebounds, or from defencive fatigue. IMHO, the improved offencive metrics are no mirage. I also think the more precise execution matters. They aren't coughing the puck up on flubbed passes nearly as often. They string multiple accurate passes together, which means we don't get hemmed in the zone as often. The improved passing also makes rushes and offencive zone plays that much more dangerous. Did anyone else get the feeling that goaltenders cheated towards our puck carriers earlier in the year because a pass was going to miss the guy's stick? We are better positioned defencively and players are not nearly as hesitant in finding their assignments. Pucks are getting cleared or covered more often. There are metrics out there which we could collect, but no one does because the game is so fast. But if we measured quality execution of hockey fundamentals, we have undeniably improved; hence we look better and play better.

The players in the line-up need to learn how to deal with the rougher game. The playoffs are undeniably more physical, so they had better get used to it. I look at these games as a way to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Now *that* is a fascinating thought experiment. Can you imagine the chances which Zemgus and Kyle create actually going in more often than every third game?

Eh wot? The last 2 times the Sabres were over NHL 0.500 after the TDL were 2012-3 and 2015-6. We have been worse every other year.

Sad, but true.

Larsson and Girgensons had better offencive awareness until XHCDDB benched and berated it out of them.

I think this merits a bit more discussion. For this argument, the Sabres could get a variant of the Alexander Mogilny trade. In this scenario, the Sabres also move Reinhart and Ristolainen to build depth and the future. Against this is that Jack has led the only consistently effective scoring line for the last 3 seasons. He has carried the team with Reinhart and a pittance of support. I think you are underestimating how good Eichel has been. The one place where I think you are objectively correct is that we need to stop thinking of Eichel and Reinhart as fruits of The Tank. That thinking is the Sunk Cost Fallacy writ large. We need to think of the team as an ensemble. It looks like GMKA is avoiding that with his off-season planning -- thankfully.

More than number, the quality of player on the shelf is staggering.

DSL?

Wow, Earth. Did you have to hit me so hard when I returned?

Who needs protection? If memory serves me right, neither Ruotsalainen nor Cozens needs protection. It looks like the Sabres should protect Skinner, Eichel, Reinhart, Asplund, Mittlestadt, Thompson, and either Olofsson or Bjork. Assuming no forward is lost, Okposo and Girgensons have enough skill that they would not be lost with Olofsson there. Having said that, both Olofsson and Bjork would be very tempting to Seattle. It is virtually certain that one of them will be available. As I personally would protect Dahlin, Borgen, and Jokiharu, I figure that Seattle will take a forward.

Just saw a tweet that Tokarski pointed to the sky at the horn. It was his first win since his father had died and he dedicated the win to him.

It is great watching the kids have fun.

DeLuca 0.500 in last 10: 5-2-3.

It is a joy to watch.

My God, how much did Hall, Staal, and XHCRK hold the team back?

If we lose Ristolainen and McCabe, what does our defencive depth chart look like?

The Sabres sold Standing Room for that game. That was where I was.