JohnC

Which of the three players mentioned (Rousek, Kulich and Rosen) do you see becoming the better NHL player in a time frame of two to three years?

You follow the Amerks as well as anyone. Could you list two to three players you believe will be ready to move up the ranks in the next couple of years?

As you are highlighting, statistical production doesn't necessarily indicate the important contributions and roles that these two players make. Both on the ice and off these two veterans are leaders on this young team, showing the youngster how to play and prepare properly. These two guys are winners on the ice, in the room and in the community. If you took them off this team, there would be a void that couldn't be immediately filled. There are many players on this roster where it is fair to be critical of, not these two standup guys.

The front office and organization would acknowledge that this team and system currently lacked depth. That's obvious for everyone to see.

I respectfully disagree. Even with a favorable set up they made enough right decisions as an expansion team to be contenders right from the start. I'm not a Pegula basher because I do believe that the course for this franchise is finally set in the right direction. And as much criticism he has received for his stewardship he should be given credit for belatedly getting the right people to restructure this franchise. But let's also acknowledge the fact that in the first few years of ownership the Pegulas made a lot of strategic and personnel blunders that set this franchise back.

Both Vegas and Seattle have had good starts from their inception because the respective organizations made a lot of good decisions. When you make a lot of decisions in the sports business not all of them are going to work out. But overall, there were more plus than minus decisions. I thought that Vegas worked the system like maestros to build a cup contending team right from the start. And the organization has continued to make some big consequential decisions such as for Jack and Stone to continue on with their successful pathway.

Yes. Without even getting into numbering the lines what is evident is that the coach has lessened their time on ice due to their unproductive play.

I disagree with you regarding Mitt's current worth. He's playing as a third line center with his minutes being limited. (Why do you think that DG has curtailed his minutes?) I'm confident in saying that his current market value is very small at this time. I'm not a Mitts basher, at least compared to the consensus assessment made by most on this site. I want him to succeed. Last year, DG said that he was one of the best players in training camp, then he got hurt. From what I have seen this year he seems to be spinning his wheels and not getting enough production to warrant much playing time. When watching him play I see that he has the parts of the game as far as effort, vision, responsible two-way play etc., but the pieces just don't seem to fall together and translate into production. One advantage he has is that he is versatile enough where he can play both the wing and center. So that is an asset. I'm not giving up on him but candidly my view of him has very much dimmed. Sometimes players become stale in one location and a change of a location can result in invigorating a career that has gone stale. With respect to Krebs I believe that a stint in Rochester with extensive playing time would benefit him. In no way am I arguing to deal him unless the return for him is too attractive.

Krebs appears to be a young player who simply isn't ready for regular NHL playing time. Maybe the best approach to build him up as a player would be to send him to Rochester and exhaustingly play him in all situations. DG has talked about the perils of being too quick to make a judgment on a young player. Krebs is the type of player who would fall withing his warnings about being too quick to judge. With respect to Mitts, I think the best thing for him is a change of scenery. The problem is that he has little value on the trade market. I have been more supportive/hopeful about him than others have been. However, that hope for him is fading almost to the point of being extinguished. It's unlikely that the Sabres will make the playoffs this year. However, I still believe that this team can get things together enough to make a legitimate run for a lower playoff spot. Even if the team falls short (as it is likely), I still believe that we can contend up to the end of the season.

I don't believe that DG is an issue. Although he wasn't a HC prior to being elevated, he has had a long history of coaching and scouting involvement in the league. In the NHL you can't hide your deficiencies. You do your best to minimize/cover them but in the end with the talent in the league your weaknesses will get exploited. (As you well know last night's game was evident of that.)

The problem isn't the coaching. He's working with the roster he has. The roster is starting to fill out. Our two top lines are good, and the second line will get even better. We have two good defensive pairings with Dahlin and Power anchoring each pair, and who will be top tier defensemen in the league. Dahlin already is in that top tier category. As is constantly repeated we need significant upgrades in net, another defenseman or two and a recasting of the third line. The GM could have done more this past offseason, he chose not to.

I didn't intend to be cute with the misspelling. But I'll take credit for that accident and claim it to be an unintended witticism. 🤡

I was as befuddled by that phantom call as the player was. It made no sense to me. When Colorado is on the PP they are masterful at quickly moving the puck around. Given more open space they are even more lethal. There is no question that Colorado is an elite team. Considering that the Sabres were playing a back to back coming off a road game and Colorado was resting in town I thought the Sabres gave them a good and energetic effort. The Sabres gave them a good challenge. The Sabres certainly have some obvious deficits that need to be addressed, but after this game I was more encouraged than discouraged about our pathway. One observation about this game: Cozens is emerging as a player. You can see the confidence he has that he is capable of being one of the big boys in this league.

I like this line better. Although I would try Mitts on the wing instead of Hinostroza for the short term. If Mitts still struggles then I would be receptive to the line you present.

I'm posing a question because I haven't seen Chychrun play that much: Wouldn't it better for the Sabres to pursue a second to third pairing defenseman who is more defensive than offensive oriented? It would cost less in assets in a trade and it would better round out the blue line unit.

Krebs is a center and not a winger.

The bigger issue about question mark players such as Mitts as it is what are the better options? Maybe for the present Krebbs should be back at center with Mitts playing on the wing? I simply don't know???

I'm not much a drinker. But I will have a whiskey that will make me loopy and dedicate it to the good news coming from you. 🍷

I was going to post something about a nagging health issue that I have been plagued with for nearly the past two months. After reading your post I feel ashamed of myself for the lack of perspective. I just want you to know that I'm wishing you the best and offering my prayers.

The coach has spoken on the radio about assessing young players. He leaned into a belief that it is better to be patient before making a concluding judgment on a young player. That is not to say that the leash for players is endless. My sense from listening to him on his last WGR radio stint is that especially for Mitts the leash is near its end. When I watch Mitts you see that there are a number of good attributes, such as skill level, skating and effort. It just doesn't seem to translate into production. And it appears the coach is recognizing it by severely curtailing his and his linemates' minutes. It would be such a bonus if Mitts could make the leap. Most others have a hardened jaundiced view of him. I'm not in that category yet. I just don't know what his issue is? Maybe he simply needs a change of scenery to refreshen his game?

In general, I thought this game was fairly called. There is no doubt that there were missed calls, but not all of them went against us. I distinctly remember a sequence of plays where the refs could have called penalties on the Sabres in the third period. The Detroit crowd definitely hooted and hollered about those calls. In this game I thought the calls (good and bad) balanced out. That's all you can ask for.

You and are in sync about the fun aspect of watching the Sabres. I'm very aware that there are many people who are not satisfied with the team's record. But what can't be denied is that this version of the team is very entertaining to watch. (As you point out.) That's definitely due to more talent but also to the philosophy of play that the HC promotes. Compare the entertainment value of a Krueger coached team to a Granato coached team? It seemed that Krueger's approach suppressed individual talents while the current coach accentuates the talents of his players. With a few more pieces this team will be even more of a compelling team to follow!

If you have a chance listen to DG's last weakly Tuesday appearance on WGR. You perfectly capture the dilemma that he faces if he juggles the Mitts line with other lines. He made the point that the other lines are clicking, and he doesn't want to disrupt the chemistry on those lines. If you listen to him you can also sense that he will have to make a change on that line. It's apparent that he is already doing so by limiting that line to limited playing time.

Whether the Sabres are up or down in a game I remain in a state of anxiety until the horn goes off. One can review the games we have lost and believe that the Sabres could have won at least three of those games. On the other hand, you can review the games we have won and conclude that we could have easily lost three of those games. So, it shouldn't be surprising that in following the Sabres this year I'm in a constant state of agitation! The one positive thing about this team compared to the previous years' teams is that this team can compete with even the top tier teams in the league. That couldn't be said before. So with all the fluctuation the trend is upward, even when we don't see it. It's better than giving 2 points to a divisional rival and not getting any points for yourself.

The back and forth scoring in games is a reflection of this era of hockey. Yzerman was interviewed on the broadcast and was asked why there so many come from behind games where teams were up or down by two goals or more. In his dour style he pointed out that hockey is faster, less defensive structure and overall, a lack of high-end goaltenders. He noted that most teams, with the exception of the few teams with elite netminders, are looking for better goalies. He said that there is simply a lack of them. He also pointed out in this era the emphasis is on coaching the offense more than the defense. For those who are more fixated on the flucuation of scoring they are not understanding that the game of today is not the game of yesterday. There is less clamping down on teams because it is simply too fast and oriented toward offensive play. As you stated enjoy a win instead of sneering at it. A win is a win.