Jump to content

JohnC

Members
  • Posts

    8,389
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JohnC

  1. 15 hours ago, dudacek said:

    1) Luukkonnen: This team is 10 points better if he returns to the form he showed two years ago

    2) Power: Analytically, the most obvious flaw in the Sabres lineup is how they lost any matchup when Dahlin wasn't on the ice. Swapping Timmins poise for Clifton's juggling hand grenades should help, and Kesselring's competence and physicality should help more. But Power has the skillset to be carrying one of those guys, rather than counting on them to be the boosters. He needs to start earning his paycheque.

    3) Norris: Jiri Kulich and Ryan McLeod could be a viable 2/3 centre spine, but no team is going to make the playoffs with them eating all the hard minutes at centre ice. Norris isn't a 1C, but he can certainly hold the fort in ways the other two can't, particularly stapled to an top winger like Tage or Tuch. Getting 75 games of his full potential dramatically improves our depth and playoff chances.

    How about moving Tage back to the 1C and Norris to the 2C? A Zucker/Tage/Tuch would make for an experienced and sizeable top line. Or a Benson/Tage/Tuch on the top line? My hope is that Quinn makes the leap forward and earns a role on the second line with Norris centering it. This is going to be an interesting camp to see how the lines get formed. I prefer to see McCleod as a 3C and with the ability to move up the lines when needed. 

    I think most people agree with you that UPL's play is the most important issue entering the season.  

  2. 2 minutes ago, Weave said:

    Im not convinced Mitts is going to be much of an upgrade over Quinn anymore.

    Danforth, he’s your grit and forecheck upgrade, right?  So much for that.

    He’s a roster spot, and one with a 3rd contract cap hit.  He needs to displace someone.

    I don’t care if specifically Mitts is added to this roster. As I have stated on a number of posts is that I wished that the GM would have added another second-line forward to the mix. @Taro T mentioned a couple of players that would be appealing. So far, that hasn’t happened. I find that disappointing. 

  3. Just now, Weave said:

    Who are you displacing with him that improves the roster?

    How about players competing for positions and roles? If he is outplayed then his role is diminished. If he outplays players then he earns his spot. Who he displaces or doesn’t displace should be predicated on his play. I’m not bothered by internal competition because I see it as a good thing.

  4. 8 minutes ago, Taro T said:

    Personally, wouldn't send out a 2nd for him either.  If the B's would take a 4, would definitely make the trade in lieu of anything else happening.  Would need to be closer to the season to be willing to go to giving up a 3 for him.

    Adding a player like Mitts also has residual benefits due to his versatility as a center and wing. And as I stated in the prior post he has the ability to move up the lines when needed due to injuries or just to shake up the lines. Another benefit is that he would be useful on the second PP unit as a setup player.

    I don’t want to get fixated on Mitts as the player to provide more flexibility to the roster. If another player could provide the same utility to our current roster I would be receptive to it. And if the cost would be a second round pick, I would find that to be a good deal. 

  5. 2 minutes ago, Weave said:

    Casey Mittlestadt looked good because it was relative to what we had available at the time. “Credibly” has alot to do with expectations.  He was better than our alternatives then, but if your expectations are playoffs, he is not a credible roster addition.

    A few off-seasons ago I said Mitts will be a useful depth forward in the NHL.  Something just north of replacement value. For a brief moment I thought he might prove me wrong.  Nope.

    The only way Mitts is someone worth putting back on the roster is if Norris ends up on LTIR.  Even then, he’s probably not a center on the Sabres anymore. I just don’t see him as a worthwhile add to the roster unless this team is in a roster bind.

    I’m not attempting to overrate his talent. But for me there is a simple metric: are the Sabres better with him, even in the short term, than without him? If he can be added for a draft pick that isn’t a first round pick, then I’m open to adding him.

    In this discussion I’m not looking at this topic from a big picture perspective. The issue is reduced to whether one thinks the team will be immediately better or not. I believe so. 

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Agree 1
  6. 5 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

    Dave Chapelle GIF by MOODMAN

    When Tage was hurt Mitts moved up to centering the first line. The line continued to play at a high level. Is he a genuine first line center talent? Clearly not. But he has played as a second line center and at wing for us and played credibly. Even if he played at the 3C spot I would have no reluctance to bring him in if it was for a 2nd round pick. However, as others have said, a first round pick would be too pricey. 

    • Agree 2
  7. 1 minute ago, JP51 said:

    Yes thats fine but I was responding to the question of does the size of this unit matter... and in my opinion, the size is nice but if you are looking for this unit to be physical they are going to need to change their modus operandi... aka spots... and we all know how often a leopard changes those...  lastly that size in itself doesnt mean you are that type of temprament.. citing smaller players that were hellions to play against...  so I dont disagree with what you are saying, but I was responding to the does size matter question... so while it may or may not be a respectable unit, I am not anticipating hard nosed physical play out of this unit..  they will just be able to see over a lot of players looking up ice LOL... 

    My point is simply that when you draft or acquire a more finesse oriented player, then that is what you get. We're not disagreeing here. 

  8. 1 minute ago, LTS said:

    Yes, but under no circumstances do I operate under the assumption that Ruff has any say in the coaching staff. Ruff taking the position was a way for him to make some money, help out his hometown team, and let Pegula clear the books a bit before the next phase in coaching took over.

    So, knowing that, the administration of the Buffalo Sabres kept Wilford, who, in my opinion is the problem here.  It doesn't matter to me if someone above is responsible for keeping him, Wilford is accountable for coaching the defensive scheme. Let's go RACI charts!

    Yes.. but we know the Sabres don't have one of those.  The GM won't allow it and I'm still not sure Pegula wants it.

    As you describe Ruff's authority, or lack of it, is a demonstration why this Pegula hockey organization is a failed organization that is structured in an unusual way. If Ruff doesn't have the authority to hire his staff at this point, then this organization deviates from how a normal franchise operates. It's ridiculous. 

  9. 1 minute ago, JP51 said:

    I am going way back... Stan Johnathan, Danny Gare, Wendall Clark, even Marchant, Brad May, Barnaby, Ray, etc... not sure any of these guys were over 6 feet, but they brought the nasty... So I love the size, but will they use it...  or do we have Mike Wilson, Tyler Myers, Richard Smell Ick, Ken Sutton, etc ... I am not seeing anyone on that list that has anywhere near the nasty of a Samulesson (Ulfy) , Pronger, Chara, Stevens, Robinson, Kasparitis, Hatcher, Zadorov, etc... (just randomly naming nasty players, not even fighting, just nasty)  Kesslring I honestly have not seen him play... maybe he is one... but if we are going to get that level of physicality to me a bunch of those guys need to change their spots... 

    Players have different skill sets and style of play. Power and Samuelsson are not thumpers and rugged players. That's not their game and never has been.  I would also say the same thing about Byram from a stylistic standpoint. The choice is you either get different players or adapt your defensive approach to their assets and not their liabilities. 

    I, like you, am not familiar with Kesserling's play. What I do know is that when he filled in as a second-pairing defenseman as an injury replacement, he played well. If he ends up as the partner for Power, then Samuelsson most likely will move down to the third-pair. The makeup of the unit could end up being Byrum/Dahlin, Power/Kesserling and Samuelsson/Timmons. I consider that a respectable unit. 

  10. 35 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

    Chris Rock Reaction GIF

    I agree that a first round pick would be too much for Mitts. However, if it was a second round pick, I would do it. I just think that our GM could have been more aggressive in adding a second line forward to the mix to create more flexibility to the lines. 

  11. 2 minutes ago, Cityo'Rasmii said:

    You consistently seem very insistent with your opinions on all topics. I wasn't there at the beginning of last season in the strategy room, were you? Maybe our illustrious owner required that the assistants be retained. Can you disprove this? You seem to have inside information which form your conclusions.

    This is Ruff’s staff. If the owner is not allowing him to hire the staff he wants, then he took the job under conditions that most HCs wouldn’t accept. When he first took-over he inherited the staff. This is a new year. This is his staff. If there are problems within the staff, then it is his responsibility to address. 
     

    If you believe that the Sabres are a well coached team, I’m confident that it is a minority view. 

     

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Agree 1
  12. 1 hour ago, Taro T said:

    True, the assistants don't dictate the system.  But they're the ones actually working with the players and they're the ones implementing the drills that the players use to learn where they're supposed to be and how they're supposed to play when the games actually happen. 

    Guarantee that in practice they aren't correcting the D and the F's when they allow somebody to be alone at the back door nor missing somebody sneaking down from up high where the F's are covering to down low where the D are expected to cover.  Why?  Because that #### happens multiple times every game.

    Guarantee that they're teaching them that stupid nearly 100' drop pass on the PP.  Why?  Because THAT #### happens every game and Power insists on it even when a F has snuck behind him anticipating the drop pass.  Rather than react to the situation as it evolves, they continue to do what they've been taught to do.  The ONLY guy that DOESN'T ALWAYS make that stupid drop pass is Dahlin.  He does it until the other team starts cheating and then he takes the easy 4 on 3 entry that he's now been given.

    (And that stupidity on the PP goes back to what's being said about what they do on D; it's just way easier to describe without having a video example to accompany it.  This coaching staff is awful.)

    Are you including Ruff in your assessment of the staff? And if you believe that Ruff is satisfied with the staff because he made no changes to the group, then isn't he the most culpable for its mediocre performance? And as you pointedly note, the same shiiiit goes on game after game. Well, if the HC is tolerating the sub-par staffing performance, then shouldn't he be held most responsible for the coaching inadequacies? 

    What's apparent to everyone is that the ownership is third rate, the GM is third rate and the coaching staff is third rate. That's not a recipe for success! 

  13. 22 minutes ago, LTS said:

    Who do you think is?  I mean, he's the consistency between Granato and Ruff.  His coaching is what allows opponents to stand between the defender and goaltender, consistently.

    And yeah, we can go back through different coaches, etc.  I'm not interested in dissecting the pre-Kevyn Adams era as the team is barely the same.  Right now there are a lot of issues but if you start from a broken foundation it won't matter who the players are because it's going to fall down.

    Ruff is the HC. If the assistant coach is constructing a system that isn't working, then isn't it the HC's obligation to intervene and require an adjustment? The same responsibility applies to the system on the PP and kill units. If the system isn't working, then he is the one that should require a change/alteration in systems. If the assistant is so inadequate, then why wasn't he replaced this year. There is a hierarchy of responsibility here. If the HC isn't satisfied with the performance of a particular assistant, then he has the authority to replace him. Or does he really have that authority to make the change/s? 

    HCs have different styles of coaching. Some are dominant in all phases of the game and others are delegators. Each coach has a system they are comfortable in. But let's not forget that ultimately the assistants are accountable to the HC. If the HC is comfortable with the status quo, then the problem lies with the HC. That's how I see it.  

    • Agree 1
  14. 7 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

    Dahlin would thrive on any of the other 31 teams, he is a star player.   Sure, Krueger held him back, he was not an NHL HC either.   He was just another failed Terry Pegula hire.  

    Terry Pegula is a third rate owner.

    KA is a third rate GM.

    Ruff and his coaches are a third rate coaching staff.

    How do you break through when you are dealing with so many liabilities? It’s a catch-22 situation that has kept this franchise stuck. The Sabres have become a dog chasing its tail franchise.

     

    • Like (+1) 1
  15. 7 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

    Kesselring and Simmons might as well be Chris Pronger and Rod Langway.   Its all about team defense, which includes the forwards. 

    I have been pounding the table that the Granato system was not a proper NHL system,  it looked more like an all star team system that you throw together for a temporary team that has lots of skill.    We still have Granato's defensive coach, Marty Wilford, under Ruff.   We still have Matty Ellis.  

    Why is this coaching staff still intact?  

    I’m not as harsh on Granoto’s looser approach to team defense as most others  are. He was trying to get his players to play a more open style of game than the stricter and more rigid style that Krueger demanded. 
     

    I think what Granato was trying to do was change their mindset from worrying about not making mistakes by rigidly adhering to the system instead of allowing his players to express their talents and play with less inhibition. In my view, Dahlin was a big beneficiary of that previous coaching change.

    I’m also aware that at some point that the players needed to play a more responsible two-way NHL game. As you point out. 

  16. 1 hour ago, inkman said:

     

     

    As Perrault and Promo eluded to, the forwards need to be just as adept at defense as the defenseman.  Based on the eye test, the forwards have done a much worse job than the defenseman at playing actual defense.  
     

    It’s about being a team player and putting forth effort where little reward is offered.  Playing sound D as a forward isn’t going to get you $7 million a season.  Scoring 30 goals will though.  Guess which path most of our forwards for the last decade have chosen.  
     

    It’s why players like Zucker and Greenway stick out.  They understand the job at both ends of the ice. Glad they were resigned.  Glad the team is coveting more defensive minded forwards.  

    I agree with your point about the importance of overall team defense that go beyond the goalies and blueliners.

    Coaches need to coach and hold all players accountable for how they play. If they allow players to play too individually at the expense of the team, then they are not adequately doing their jobs.

  17. I wasn't able to read the link. But from the comments that have been made the underlying issue/question is whether our blueline unit is better with the additions made this offseason. Will the additions of Kesserling and Simmons upgrade the unit? If Kesserling becomes I suitable partner for Power, I think it will be an upgrade to that Power pairing. Will keeping Byram instead of trading him add to the unit? I would say yes. And will Samuelsson get healthy, regain his confidence and stabilize his game? As a third pairing player I think that would be a better situation for him. Will a Byrum/Dahling coupling turn out to be an upper echelon #1 pairing? With Dahlin it should be. On paper, the hope is that we will have three pairings where the players are slotted where they should be and not above what they are capable of. 

     

  18. 2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

    There is a good reason Mittelstadt isn't here and no, I wouldn't trade for him, even draft picks. 

    If it was just draft picks, I would be open to do so. I agree with those who say  a first round pick would be too costly, but for a lower pick I would be receptive to such a deal. 
     

    The main consideration is whether adding him improves this roster? I would say yes. 

  19. 39 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

    That is exactly all I am saying. 

    Any decent forward for draft picks is a plus. 

    Not better than he was, but the roster better than it currently is. Temporary hole fill while Helenius develops. You got a better player who is available for draft picks I'm all for it. 

    Would you give up a first round pick for him? I would be open to it. 

    • Shocked 1
    • dislike 2
  20. 7 hours ago, gilbert11 said:

    I guess I just have to accept that Power is who he is.  I expected a 6’6” 225# defenseman to have a lot more than 26 hits in 79 games.  What a waste of size!    He’s like a 7 foot NBA player hanging out at the 3 point line.

    What you expected him to be is different from who he is as a defenseman. Just because he does’t fall within your vision on how someone with his size should play doesn’t mean he is a failure. What it indicates is that you are off the mark in evaluating him. 
     

    Power is going to be an anchor defenseman for us. Especially for defensemen with his size, it takes time to fully develop. He was the consensus top pick in his draft year. And he was the right pick for us. 
     

    I just don’t understand all the lamenting about him. It makes no sense to me especially when there are so many other players who are question marks on this team, most notably our goalie.

  21. 29 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

    Definitely, the only way to get Buffalo back off those lists is a complete reboot. Pegula has to announce he's stepping back, hires an experienced and respected NHL guy to run the organization who in turn hires a coach players want to play for and then they spend and make serious moves designed to win. If they do that the perception changes and players will start to want to be part of that.

    Younger fans (even middle age maybe at this point) might not remember, but Buffalo was once considered a top notch team and a good destination. 

    The Sabres’ organization is constructed and staffed the way TP wants it to be. It’s his toy to play with. He has the authority to make the substantive changes you listed. Will he make them? Probably not, at least right now. I really believe that it will take outside pressure (league office) to force him to act more competently.

     

  22. 21 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

    I just don't believe the jury is still out on him.   

    He is what he is at this point of his career... he's a career .898/3.05, with over 200 pro games played.   His numbers in Rochester were not good, and his numbers in the NHL are not good.   I don't understand what anybody sees in him..... I suppose in the land of the blind one-eyed man is King.

    TBD.

×
×
  • Create New...