Archie Lee

I’m not sure they could fit Meier in, but we won’t likely be paying multiple 4th line and 3rd pairing D $2.5 mil per year.

Hughes went 1st overall in 2019 and he is in year one of an 8x8. Boldy went 12th that year and starts a 7x7 next year. Splitting the difference at 7.5 x 7 or 8 years seems reasonable.

I think it is possible to be mildly disappointed by this while also acknowledging that it is not likely a significant long-term setback. Short term I do think it hurts a little. Looking at things in a vacuum, I would have waived Hinostroza as I think we have multiple forward options in Rochester (Biro, Murray, Rousek…) who could be tried in a bottom 6 role and maybe even deserve an opportunity. Our D depth was not good and is now worse. Others are correct though in stating that similar players hit waivers a few times a year. Still, better in my view to have a guy you know. Also, it might surprise some to know that Matt Irwin has played 31 games for the Capitals this season. He has played 10 years in the NHL, 47 playoff games (maybe more in 2023), 10 years in the NHL without ever having a contract that paid him more than a million $ a year. Players of his talent level, and Fitzgerald’s, Clague’s, Fedun’s, Ruhwedel’s, etc., have been filling out the bottom depth of NHL playoff teams forever. As our top D and forwards are going to get paid soon, we should get used to seeing such players filling out some of our 5-9 D positions.

No great options here, but perhaps we are finally having to make a decision that fits in the “good problem to have” category. Fitz probably clears I think, so that might be the simplest way to address one spot. I like having 8 D though. While an upgrade is always a nice thought, I think Bryson, Boosh, Clague, Fitz and Pilut give us better depth than is generally thought. Dahlin and Power are studs and the big minutes they play speaks as much to their prowess as to any lack of depth, in my view. I would send UPL down and waive Vinnie. If Vinnie doesn’t want to go to Rochester maybe a Moulson-like deal can be made where he goes home and plays for the Chicago Wolves. As others have said, we have multiple forwards in Rochester who can come up and fill that role if needed. Comrie would then get 2 of the next 3 home games. If the team keeps rolling then there is nothing to worry about. If Comrie falters you recall UPL and need to make a decision. It was always more than likely that due to an injury UPL would get an extended stretch in the NHL this season. It’s good that he has played well. I think, at this point, it is fine to just stick with the plan.

The Sabres having multiple games postponed has messed with the standings. A couple of thoughts though: - On Nov 20, 2022 the Sabres were 14th in the conference and had a points % of .388. From a points % standpoint they were .190 behind the 2nd wildcard team - Today the Sabres are 10th in the conference but from a points % standpoint are only .023 behind the 2nd wildcard team The Sabres could fade, of course. There are still red flags to be sure (Can the goaltending hold-up? Will inexperience be a factor? Is their current shooting % close to sustainable?). But it also might be that the 8 game losing streak was the anomaly and everything else that we have seen since March 1, 2022 is the new mean. I had the NHL network on yesterday afternoon with Boomer and Jake. Not saying that he is an expert or anything, but on the topic of Eastern Conference playoffs and whether it will be 5 metro teams that make it, Boomer's view is that it will be 4 metro teams because "the Sabres are a freight train".

In a few weeks the Sabres will add a young 2nd pairing right shot D with about 230 games of NHL experience.

I think UPL goes down when Comrie comes up and as long as Comrie/Anderson give us good goaltending and the team keeps winning it is kind of a non issue. If Comrie doesn’t play well or Anderson falters then a decision needs to be made. This stint for UPL has rekindled confidence that he is a legit NHL goalie. It affirms that the plan of Comrie/Anderson this year and then Comrie/UPL next year was logical. We just need Comrie to hold up his end now and play at a higher level with the team doing the same in front of him.

Comrie was good to start the year and then struggled. Luukkonen started poorly but has been better lately. Their respective #'s on the year are not good, but theyr are better than Vanecek's December #'s (.869 in 6 starts). The sample sizes from this year are too small to draw conclusions on any of the goalies you have referenced. The plan is absolutely to go with Comrie/Anderson this year and Comrie/UPL next year. I don't think that means that a change in the plan can't occur, should Comrie or UPL not live up to expectations. Looking at their #'s to this point in the season you can argue they have not met expectations. There are 50 games left though. Also, the team is starting to play better and that may play a factor in the #'s the goalies post from here.

I’m also in the neither camp. While I admit that I would be excited if we acquired either player (price dependent of course) I don’t think Adams will be in the running for either. I’m comfortable with that. At some point this year Comrie will be back and Luukkonen will be back in Rochester. Both still have time to turn what has been a disappointing start into a positive ending. We won’t acquire another goalie until after Levi is signed, if we do at all. Joker is our #4, I think. The bottom pairing guys will continue to get the year to prove they can be NHL d men and can play up the lineup when needed. There is lots of season left for this situation to play out further. The same goes, more or less, for the bottom 6 forwards, with some Rochester guys in the mix for next year also. Right or wrong, our big contracts will be the players we develop and who Adams believes have earned and can handle the responsibility.

Maybe the team is turning a corner defensively. Our last 3 games were against Pittsburgh and LA, teams in the top 10 in scoring. 6 goals against in regulation.

I thought I saw glimpses from Krebs last night that pointed towards him being our 3rd line C in the long-term. Fast, good at both-ends, abrasive, won a couple big face offs (though his final % wasn’t good). He will get stronger and the game will slow down for him.

Not likely to happen, and maybe creates a hole down the line-up, but for a short-term period how good would Cozens be on the wing with Thompson and Tuch? Gives Krebs a chance to play with Quinn and Peterka and Asplund gets in with Girgs and Okposo. Cozens/Thompson/Tuch Mittelstadt/Jost/Olofsson Quinn/Krebs/Peterka Girgensens/Asplund/Okposo

It's hard not to scoreboard watch. Just from the games being played last night, 4 teams that we are somewhat realistically trying to catch all won (NYI, Wash, NYR and Pit). The Sabres seem to have course corrected after the 8 game losing streak. I think they are closer to the 7-3 team that started the year or to the 5-2-2 team post-streak than they are to being a bad team. I'm trying to see the season as a long-game, and not get too worked-up over any single loss. Getting to Deluca .500 remains the key for me. If the Sabres can get to Deluca .500 by game 70, they position themselves to go on a 12 game heater to end the season and have a shot at the playoffs. That we had no loser points until game 22 is an anomaly I think. 35-28-7 at game 70 (as an example) positions any team to finish on a hot streak and push to get in.

The individual sample sizes on each of our 3 goalies this season is too small to draw any conclusions on what they will do the rest of the way. Anderson is not likely to stay at .917 and if 6K continues to get games his performance is likely to improve at least a bit. Comrie post-injury? Who knows? The cumulative group sample is big enough though to draw the conclusion that when Anderson plays they generally have a chance to win and when Luukkonen/Comrie are in, the Sabres are getting mostly sub-average goaltending. I know this is not a long term answer, but if 6K’s game does not stabilize in the next week then I would sign Houser to an NHL deal and bring him up. Chances are he is not good enough, but what have you got to lose? He has given the Sabres 5 quality starts in 6 games the past 2 seasons. Why not give him a month of rotating with Anderson? He is, frankly, a better minor league goalie than 6K or Subban. I don’t think the Sabres will consider a trade for a long-term goalie until after Levi is signed. Adams has put too many eggs in the Levi basket to allow acquiring a long-term established goalie solution to jeopardize a Levi signing. The best case scenario at this point, aside from an improbable 6K or Houser run, is that we sign Levi at season end and he goes to Rochester next season and then, with Levi signed, Adams signs a second Comrie-like UFA and combined with Comrie that UFA gives us tending that allows us to be in playoff contention.

I think a question to ask when determining if the Sabres are a playoff or Cup contender is: are our best players among the best players in the league? Back in September, The Athletic published an article where they ranked the league's top 100 skaters (no goalies) and placed them in 4 tiers: MVPs, Franchise Players, All-Stars and Top of the Lineup players. https://theathletic.com/3590441/2022/09/15/nhl-player-rankings-connor-mcdavid/ Not surprisingly, the league's best teams from last year led the way when it came to how many players they had on the list. Calgary has 7, Colorado 6, Florida, Toronto, Tampa, Carolina, Minnesota and St. Louis have 5 each. Edmonton is an outlier with only 3 players on the list, but two of them are in tier 1. Vegas is the only non-playoff team from a year ago with more than 3 players on the list. The Sabres had only one player who made the list. That was Dahlin who was placed in the 4th tier and was ranked 99th out of the top 100. There is a lot to debate about the list (which is the point) and I'm not putting it forward as any sort of gold standard. I would have placed Dahlin higher. I think it is a generally fair attempt at such a ranking though and I don't think there was a strong argument in September 2022 for including any other Sabre on the list just yet. Fast forward to today, and recognizing this year's sample size is too small to draw definitive conclusions, and Dahlin is in Tier 2 at least. Thompson is in tier 3 or high in tier 4. There is an argument for Tuch in tier 4. Then there are players like Cozens and Power who look to me like they are going to be worthy soon. Samuelsson could soon be a player like Pelech, Pulock or Brodin who are in tier 4. Other young players have potential to raise their games to these levels. I don't know that we are legit just yet, but indications are we are going to get there sooner than later.

I would summarize by saying it was a bad trade that looks like it may weirdly workout in the end. There is an argument that had Botterill hired a better coach and had they placed leadership in the hands of O’Reilly and Okposo instead of Eichel that things would have worked out better. There was no chance of that though because Botterill was not a good GM.

As I understand it, there is no compensatory pick for Portillo. As for Johnson, it would be the 31st or 32nd pick in rd 2 of the 2024 draft I believe. I think it is too early in the season to draw any conclusions about Portillo's performance / save %. That said, I don't think we are signing him. As for Johnson, his value was never going to be as a points producer. I think he is something between Samuelsson and Bryson. He is a defence first D-Man who skates better than Samuelsson but is not as big or physical. Johnson will most likely be an NHL player. I think he is worth more to the Sabres if signed than the 63rd or 64th pick in 2024.

This is true, but the issue is exaggerated by the small sample size through 6 or 7 games. Mittelstadt was not going to play out the season with a sub 40% corsi any more than Craig Anderson was going to finish with a .970 save %.

I agree with this, which is why we should not get too excited over 1 or 2 wins or too down over 1 or 2 losses. On balance, we probably deserved a better fate in our loss to MTL and we were fortunate to come out of Alberta with 2 wins. The season-sample-size is too small to draw conclusions yet. That goes for the team in general and for the performance of any one or two players.

Mitts and Olofsson have not been good, but they have been maybe just the worst or close to the worst on a team that is fortunate to be 4-3. I'm not more worried about these two players that I am about the team in its entirety. To this point the team is out performing their underlying #'s. I'm no analytics expert but I understand that if a player has a PDO over 102 it means that the team is likely outproducing their actual performance when that player is on the ice. A PDO below 98 means the opposite. The Sabres line-up is full of players who currently have a PDO over 102. The only player below 98 right now is Bryson; that actually fits the eye-test to me as I think Bryson more than others has had poor defensive zone puck-luck thus far. The most disturbing stat for me is that Comrie has a goals against average (GAA) of 3.41 and that is a 1/2 goal better than the expected GAA of 3.95. We have a lot of guys who need to be better, not just Mittelstadt and Olofsson.

Always disappointing to watch an effort like that. But hockey is more baseball than football and over 82 games, all teams will have clunkers. Just in the past 2-3 days Columbus beat the Rangers 5-1, Wpg beat Stl 4-0 and NJ beat Det 6-2. I’m not making excuses, but Seattle is far from a free space on the bingo card and it looked to me like the Kraken made it clear early that they did not care about our speed and were committed to it being a physical game. We looked like we were maybe just ready to get home without anyone else on the IR. Lots will be made of Mittelstadt’s lazy gaff. My msg would not be to single Mitts out but to let the team know that with a poor team effort like that everyone is at risk of being on the highlight real for the wrong reason. Learn from it. I’m not down on Pilut after one game. If we judged everyone on that game alone there would be a dozen players headed to Rochester. Still, there is no overstating how tough it is to lose Samuelsson and Joker.

I don't know. He still thinks highly of Dahlin. I don't think it is ridiculous to suggest that in an actual 2018 redraft Dahlin would not go #1 and could fall as far as #4. Also, he improved Samuelsson's ranking to #13 and basically acknowledges he was wrong on that one.

I agree with the bolded. Skinner thrives with a shooter. For Thompson to shoot he needs the puck in the offensive zone. To do that he needs a winger who helps flips the ice and retrieve pucks. Skinner/Thompson/Tuch just makes sense. I think Asplund is possibly being wasted on a "4th line". I think Asplund/Mittelstadt/Olofsson works. Of course, there is a tendency today to treat the start of the NHL season like it is the first couple weeks of the college football season where you can legitimately say if our QB doesn't get it together soon the season is lost. The start of this season for Skinner/Thompson/Olofsson is more like an MLB team's 4-5-6 hitters going through the season's first series hitting a combined .125. If it continues the season is sunk. But your 4-5-6 hitters are not hitting .125 over 162 games. Skinner/Thompson/Olofsson is not a well constructed line in my view, but they are not going 82 games with an average xGF% of 22.

Fair enough. I'm certainly not arguing that this was a franchise altering mistake. Someone wrote that we should have kept Borgen over Bjork and you, quite correctly, pointed out that it was not so simple. I just added to the discussion that there was an option that might have allowed keeping Borgen (protect Skinner and expose Bjork) and that the Sabres not doing this was a pretty clear indication they valued Bjork more. In my view that was a mistake, but I acknowledge: - We have more information on both players now than we had then. - The Sabres could have protected Skinner and exposed Bjork and Seattle might still have picked Borgen (I actually think the Kraken still take Borgen); and - As mistakes go this one may well fall into the category of barely consequential. I'll add one thing. If you went to the GM of every NHL team right now and said you have to take Borgen or Bjork and find a place for him on your roster, I think close to 32 of them take Borgen. At the time of the expansion draft it is probably closer to 50/50.

Some mistakes are small and don't have much impact on the bigger picture. Borgen, I think, is a more useful player and a more valuable asset than Bjork.