JohnC
-
Posts
6,005 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
On 9/2/2020 at 10:51 PM, LGR4GM said:
It's a major step down. Larsson is a smothering player and Lazar just hasn't been.
Losing Larsson is a major problem added to the list.
There's no question that Larsson is a better player than Lazar on a variety of fronts. As you noted he is a more of smothering defensive player who is called on to control the best offensive players. And as you and others have previously noted he does have the ability to show more offensively than his current role and the players he is joined with allow for.
But the reality of the offseason and the market is that you can't control and retain all the players you want to. Career-wise Larsson playing for Buffalo from an individual player perspective has to an extent stifled his talents. For sure he is not going to be a prolific offensive player but his role has restricted his numbers. And he is certainly is aware of that. The issue here isn't does Buffalo want to keep as it is does he want to stay. From a career standpoint I don't think he believes that it is in his best interest. (My opinion.) I would love to have him stay because he adds an element of toughness that this team lacks.
-
2 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Agree, and it's a mark of how badly we need one, at C, that I'd be reasonably satisfied with merely a bonafide 2C addition, if we can manage that. Provided, we adequately replace Larsson in the bottom 6. Replacing Larsson is, in my estimation, more important that a top 6 rw. And a top 6 rw is pretty important.
I slightly disagree with your take about Larsson. It should be noted that I am a Larsson fan and recognize that he adds an element of toughness that this team lacks. But if he isn't retained I believe that Lazar can adequately fill his role. He might not be as good as Larsson but his style of play can compensate for his loss. I would definitely prefer a top 6 winger who not only would elevate the second line but push down another player to a lower line.
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
You are operating under the assumption that they are going to adequately address the second line - so yes, if we are counting that as a given, the play of the goalies, who you've also stipulated as going unaddressed positionally, will probably be the biggest factor, that and injuries.
The team is DOA on arrival without the additions you speak of so, I can't help but focus on that, as it's under team control. Unless Ullmark turns into prime Lundqvist, he's not going to make up anything close to the WAR we need to make the playoffs, regardless, sans actual 2nd line upgrades.
There's a whole whack of work that needs to be done this offseason, to get this team into a position where potential internal development is enough to bridge the playoff gap.
I say this with no equivocation: Unless talent is added from the outside this team is doomed to continue meandering on its road to nowhere meaningful. In my opinion this team needs two second line caliber additions in order to be taken seriously. I believe it is doable because we do have the assets to parlay in order to better balance this very imbalanced roster.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
So we probably don't want to put ourselves in a position, heading into the year, where we are relying on too much of a favourable projection for Ullmark. We want to make these levels we are hoping our players ascend to as attainable as possible.
If we need Ullmark to succeed, we should probably put some stallwart defensive players in front of him, on both ends of the ice. Keep the play in the other end, too. Manipulate what we can to the best of our ability to try and put enough bowling bumpers on the track to keep his development on target. We don't hope for development with Ullmark, we alter the environment to be favourable to such.
Early returns are Krueger's system is amenable to that, he just needs the guys, apparently.
This is a very smart post. I'm sure you know that your thesis applies to all goalies on all teams. The better the team and the more defensively oriented it is the more effective your goalie is going to be. As you are indicating a goalie playing for a team like the Islanders with their defensive orientation is more likely to have consistent and effective goaltending. Can a prolific scoring team win more than a defensive oriented team? Yes, in the regular season. However, when the regular season ends and the playoffs start then your suggested constructive team is more likely to succeed with a tighter played game.
I agree with your observation and take on Krueger. He wants a lineup full of responsible players who are aware of their defensive responsibilities not only when they are in their defensive zone but also to a lesser extent when they are in their offensive zone. What he doesn't seem to have an affinity for are players who are floaters. And because of that inclination he doesn't seem to have much affection for Skinner.
Where I have a nuanced difference with your astute comments is that Ullmark's progression as a player is very much in his own hands. He's not an island onto himself as a player but to a degree he is. I'm hoping that his progression as a goalie continues but I'm not sure.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, dudacek said:
I think the boldest is very astute.
Ullmark is about to enter goalie prime years and his has been a path of steady growth and improvement:
22 AHL rookie 28 games, 902 S%
23 AHL starter 55 games, 909
24 AHL stud 45 games, 922
25 NHL rookie 37 games, 905
26 NHL starter 34 games 915
27 ???
A lot of times goalies just seem to step out of the shadows in the back half of their 20s after paying their dues and emerge: Lehner and Markstrom are two playing right now that fit that mould.
It would be nice.
Goalies are an odd lot. Sometimes you think that one is on an upward trajectory, and then surprisingly slides back. Sometimes an inconsistent goalie is dealt and then shines in the new location, and then shortly thereafter falls back to the lower pack. Last year, Binnington was the stalwart player who was instrumental in the Blues winning the cup. This year he slid back. You just don't know other than how important that position is for success.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Thorny said:
Skinner - Eichel - Reinhart
Olofsson - Kahun - Johansson
Thompson - Lazar - Okposo
X - X - X
Dahlin - Ristolainen
McCabe - Montour
Miller - Jokiharju
Hutton
Ullmark
- - -
This is our current roster composed of established NHL players, including RFAs, season starts in 3 months. We've got Asplund, Cozens, Mittelstadt, Ruotsalainen, and whatever trades and UFA signings we can muster in those months as potential supplements.
As of now, I count 9/20 slots adequately filled. Players currently slotted in a role where we can EXPECT them to produce adequately, for that relative role. Eichel, Skinner, Reinhart, Olofsson, Dahlin, McCabe, Montour, Jokijarju, and Ullmark.
Any 2 of Risto, Montour, Jokijarju can represent those adequately filled bottom-4 RHD roles I listed (and I'd listen to an argument for all 3 roles being competently filled, depending on how much load Dahlin is ready to carry), and Ullmark is definitely a solid backup, at least, at this stage. There's still a hole on the LHD side.
F - 4/12
D - 4/6
G - 1/2
*It should be noted that the hope lies in the fact that there are several "two birds, one stone" scenarios available to us. Ie - properly filling in the second line bumps several others down to an adequate position.
I'm confident that the front office is going to address the 2C position and upgrade the second line this offseason. I also believe that the roster is going to be boosted by the internal improvement of our young players such as Kahun, Joki, Dahlin, Olofsson, Tage etc. The biggest factor that will determine success will be the quality of our goaltending. Will Ullmark be sufficient as a #1 goalie? I don't know. I realize that Hutton had a down year last season but as a sparsely to moderately used backup I consider him adequate enough. My sense is that the organization is going to stick with the current tandem in goal. In my estimation Ullmark is going to be the most important player determining whether this franchise is able to get out of its extended rut.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:
If Larsson leaves, this team needs 3 centers in the offseason instead of just 2
I'm a Larsson fan. His hardnosed style of play is what is lacking on this mostly soft team. However, from the player's perspective the right thing to do is go to another team and start fresh. For the past couple of years he has had to endure a stale situation for his game. Although he's on an effective checking and defensive line his personal game has been stifled because of the offensive limitations of his wingers.
I don't consider Larsson a genuine 2C. But on the Sabres he should have been given more opportunities to play as a 2C with wingers who were more adept on offense than his regular playing mates. He was never going to be a prolific scorer but he did have more to draw from in his offensive game. It simply was not tapped into here. I'm sure he is smart enough to realize that he needs a change of scenery. Coaches such as Trotz and Tortorella, among a lot of other coaches, would love to have him on their teams.
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, IvanPutski said:
Domi also brings physical play too. Something this team sorely lacks.
The future contract issue is something that I am concerned with. I'm open to trading for any player/s that improves the roster. There is no debating that the second line and especially the 2C position needs to be addressed.
I'm excited about what the transactions will be this offseason to upgrade and rework the roster.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Like a lot of potential trade acquisitions, Domi has his warts.
His game lacks discipline, in that he likes to freelance, his attention to detail without the puck is lacking, and he will take stupid penalties. He also strikes me as entitled: his being available is due to him wanting to play a top 6 centre role and he wants a big contract. Montreal's coach preferred to use two 20-year-olds who have 80 career points combined ahead of him.
With the caveats out of the way, he's easily a top six forward on the Sabres, is a legitimate centre despite playing most of his career at wing, can drive offence on his own, has a mean streak and had great chemistry with Reinhart at the WJC.
So hell yeah, if the price is right on both acquisition and contract.
If you had a choice between trading for Danault or Domi which player would you deal for? Factoring in the selection would be the cost for the deal and the contracts carried now and in the future for each player. My sense is that Krueger does not like players who freelance compared to responsible two way players. Skinner seems to be a less favored Krueger player because he is more inclined to float.. Maybe Danault would be a more favored target by the Sabre braintrust?
-
4
-
-
4 hours ago, john wawrow said:
very much, yes.
pardon belated response.
Thank you for your response.
When I made my comment about the primary reason for the former GM's firing I was pilloried by many. Terry and Kim stated that they had on going conversations with the GM after the season about their desire to restructure (downsize) the organization without getting him to agree to it. He was then fired. What's obvious is obvious. Even Inspector Clouseau could figure this out.
-
14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Seth Jarvis
In the top 5-12 players which players are capable of playing in the NHL in their first year, and which players could be ready to play in their 2nd yr, and which players could be ready by their third year?
-
29 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
Oh I'd gladly volunteer but I do not think I've earned it or have the internet capabilities/expertise to carry it off. I suspect there are a number of people that feel the same way as that.
Let's get back to talking hockey. It's more enjoyable than talking about the imperfect process of a forum.
-
13 hours ago, shrader said:
So spamming when they’re told to stop. So you mean topics just like this thread or everything you’re ranting about now? Seriously folk, it a hockey message board. Let’s continue to whine like it’s North Korea. Bitch bitch bitch. This place is so much better when we get over ourselves. With each passing day I keep expecting the plug to be pulled Fortunately others can handle a lot more whining than I can.
keep looking for that works without bias. It exists in the same place as that world without a sun.
I texted the dear leader to see if he was interested in serving as a monitor. He quickly said yes. He also stated that he has no qualms with dissenters because he has a disposable and vanishing way of handling the dissenters. ☠️
-
24 minutes ago, Taro T said:
Pretty sure, other than the 2 that actually are moderators here, nobody that has posted in this thread.
You hit it on the mark. It is a thankless responsibility that less than a few people are willing to do. Regardless who is monitoring the room there will be some dissatisfaction on how it is run. I'm not denigrating anyone who has a complaint about how the job is being done. There is validity to some of the criticisms. But as someone else noted unless the monitoring is grossly erratic and unfair (and that is not the case here) the most reasonable remedy would be to adjust to the umpire.
To those who step up and volunteer to be monitors I say thank you.
-
7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
which is exactly why it's better to have more than one.
Who is volunteering to do that unappealing chore?
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
I'm not saying zero moderation. What I'm saying is not so quick and no so judgemental. Most, stress MOST, arguments or drifts to politics or whatever will play themselves out in a handful of posts if left alone. Mostly on boards like this that are left alone more a small argument ensues, then somebody gives up and exits that discussion in a huff and it's scrolled by and forgotten with the next bit of hockey news.
imo people only really need to be muted if they spam when lots of people tell them to stop or if they get personal and start calling each other names/insults etc. Off topic drifts are not so important and usually don't last long.
Each moderator is going to exercise their own judgment. While you would prefer to allow the discussions to play out on their own, others might prefer a quicker cessation or movement of the disputed topic so that it doesn't spill over to constant rancorous exchanges. Again, it is an exercise in making judgments. That's what moderators do.
No one is going to completely agree with a moderator's judgment. Some moderator's prefer a looser format while others prefer a tighter format. However, if one is to give more allowance to someone I'm going to give it to the person who volunteers to do that thankless task. In addition, if you believe a particular moderator is repeatedly exhibiting a judgment/behavior that you find troubling, then PM the person and express those concerns.
-
11 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
I wondered why there was only 1 mod getting on my case, now I know. One biased active moderator is a bad idea. I'd personally like the thing to moderate itself. Generally in these kind of places things take care of themselves and good moderators really only need to step in if a LOT of people get upset about something or someone.
The last thing you need is not to have any moderating of a forum. Problems don't take care of themselves. On the contrary they escalate into personal feuds and a breakdown in civil discourse. Factions develop and silos become more impenetrable.
Can moderators be biased? Yes they can. But even when there is an observable leaning that doesn't mean that a moderator can't reasonable carry out his/her function. I'm relatively new here. Overall, I have no major complaints how this place is moderated. It is a thankless job that is more likely to attract criticisms than expressions of appreciation.
If someone feels that the moderator is not treating him/her fairly then express your complaint and then move on. As far as posters leaving for whatever reason/s--- that is their prerogative. If one gets so aggravated over a discussion in which they have the ability to not participate in then their choosing to leave the site is their decision and right.
-
5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Larsson looked good with Skinner for the 1 period they were allowed to be together.
Even when Larsson played with his regular linemates he created scoring chances forcing the action and driving to the net. However, there weren't enough supporting finishers. I agree with you that if he regularly played on a line with Skinner his numbers would be much better. But even acknowledging that I don't see Larsson as a 2C. Maybe as a temporary fill-in but not as a regular on a Skinner line.
Larsson is a feisty and edgy player. This team doesn't have enough tough players. I hope the organization keeps him.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Curt said:
Yeah, not a point per game, but I was trying to illustrate a point. Some guys can be very productive at lower levels, but then need to conform to a different role in the NHL. Larsson is an example. Asplund should be very productive in Alvensken, even if his NHL role does not project to a high scoring player.
Larsson, As a 19 yr old in the SEL: 36 pts in 49 games
As a 21/22 year old in the AHL: 81 pts in 95 games
Thats more production than most Sabres prospects.
When Larsson was a prospect there actual was a hope/expectation that he would be a productive offensive player. More like a 30-40 point middle 6 C, but still, more than he has produced.
If you had Larsson centering for better scoring wings his production would easily be in the range that you would hope for. His current role centering between Girgensons and Okposo is more of a checking and defensive role. If he played with a winger such as Skinner, Olofsson or Reinhart his points would definitely go up. The line he is playing on is arguably playing its role as well as any line in the rotation, maybe even better than the top line. It is admittedly a limited and defined role but it is fulfilling its role exceptionally well. I'm not suggesting that Larsson would ever be a prolific scorer but he certainly could be a more contributing scorer with different linemates.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Brawndo said:
Lance Lysowski came up with a list of prospective centers for the Sabres to target. He added Kerfoot later, but Dvorak would be an interesting, though expensive, target as well.
Thank you for the post. As Lysowski points out if option A type of players can't be acquired there are some reasonable option B type of players that could be available at reasonable prices. Arranging big deals to get Monahan or Cirelli are going to be tough to work out. But getting one of those secondary type talents would still upgrade our second line and allow us to not only retain some of our other players but also allow us to parlay them for additional help.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, nfreeman said:
Do you think Labatt felt like your posts were "careful?" It sure looked like he got offended and left -- which has happened a number of times as a direct result of people (not just you) blasting away with politically-related ad hominem attacks in threads on the main board. Neo left and now it looks like Flagg has done so as well.
If your point is that discussions of race relations aren't political, I think you're just splitting hairs.
There's a reason the politics club was formed. Keep it there, please.
Whether you are talking sports, race, social issues, economics, sports stadiums and who should pay for them etc. politics is inescapably intertwined with most topics. There is an option for people who find any discussion tainted by politics distasteful: Don't respond and don't get involved with the topic. It's as simple as that. Bringing passion to an issue, pro or anti, to these type of discussions doesn't lessen the political nature of the discussion but rather intensifies and prolongs it. There are plenty of topics on this board to choose from. If a particular topic is so irritating there is an obvious solution to the problem. Simply avoid it. One person who declared he was forever leaving this site because he found the intrusion of politics on a sports site so repugnant then gave an extended eloquent response why he chose to leave. That reaction was perplexing. Why even bother to get involved with an issue when there is an option to avoid it?
-
On 8/25/2020 at 6:14 PM, dudacek said:
Philip Danault is a matchup dream. One of the better defensive centres in the league and probably a better all-around player than Monahan.
Love to add that guy.
What do you think a deal with Montreal for Danault would look like? If as you indicate he plays a very strong defensive game it is a quality that Krueger would embrace in a player.
49 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:Here's an idea I came up with which actually got some Canadiens fans to bite
BUF Receives:
Danault, Phillip
2020 1st round pick (MTL) - 16th Overall
Additional Details:
Signs a 6x5.25mil extension.
MTL Receives:
Montour, Brandon [RFA Rights]
Thompson, Tage [RFA Rights]
2020 1st round pick (BUF) - 8th Overall
2021 2nd round pick (BUF)
The idea is to get a 2C/eventual 3C who is more defensive in nature to lessen Eichel's need to literally be out there 26 min a night. We move down in the 1st round but still have a mid-1st pick to help replenish our prospect pool.
My other primary targets would be Cirelli or Tierney as they all play a Selke-winning styled game and to go far in the playoffs, that is a must have.
Your deal seems a little hefty but I would take it. Maybe I would quarrel over the 2021 2nd round pick.
-
34 minutes ago, apuszczalowski said:
This is true in some cases, but what players have the Sabres disinvested in that moved elsewhere and became more successful?
Recently Lehner comes to mind but that was more of his own personal demons then anything else
O'Reilly might be another, but he wasn't bad here
Since the Pegulas have taken over how many coaches and GMs has the organization gone through? This constant churning of staff and systems is not conducive to a stable and winning franchise. There are teams that have been involved in a rebuilding program for a shorter duration and have successfully made the arduous transition to being a serious team. Different staffs have different reconstruction philosophies that don't shorten the time in a rebuild as much as they prolong it. Based on its prolonged lackluster record Buffalo is a good example of how not to run an operation.
I like the Pegulas and are glad that they became the owners. Without question they are well intentioned. However, they have been very misguided in their attempt to manage the franchise. I'm hoping that they will have learned from their mistakes.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
I am going to pause you right here at the bold.
Olofsson is 25
Kahun is 25
Ullmark is 27
Tage will be 23 before the season resumes.
The Sabres are not giving a lot of "young players" playing time. They are giving a lot of players in the middle playing time. There's lots of 24-28 year olds in the NHL. The LA pieces I mentioned are all under the age of 22. It should tell us all something if the only forward we can name under 23 that we really think has a legit top 6 shot is Cozens. We can still consider Mitts I suppose but he really has to show something this season.
The Sabre players that you listed with their ages indicates that they are at a young enough age to play for an extended period of time. They may be older than the players on LA but that doesn't alter the fact that the Buffalo players will be playing as established player for the foreseeable future.
2020 Off-season gameplan
in The Aud Club
Posted
I agree with you that Lazar is a step down from Larsson and their talents don't equate with one another. And I also agree with you that due to Larsson's established role that it has inhibited his offensive talents. And that is why I believe that Larsson as a free agent will decide to move on to go to a team that offers him more opportunity to expand his game. His primary role as a defensive stalwart is established. He is certainly not an offensive dynamo but there is room for his offensive role to grow. Larsson recognizes that. And that is the reason why I believe that he will make the decision to move on and seek a fresher pasture.
Or to put it in a lesser wordy manner: We agree on the Larsson issue.