WildCard Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Why not? Moulson can ride the pine until someone gets hurt. If Nylander is on the team, and I think I will be, Moulson could very easily be healthy scratched. We don't have to play him "just because", especially if it hurts the team. Free ride over. Gorges won't be starting. Who's gonna sit? Beaulieu? Antipin? Gorges is definitely the first bench option, here. My issue with Nylander is he's shown absolutely no reason to be on the NHL team yet, let alone the 1st line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 My issue with Nylander is he's shown absolutely no reason to be on the NHL team yet, let alone the 1st line. If he's here, he's not playing on line 3 or 4. He'll be put in a position where he actually has a chance to succeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 (edited) If he's here, he's not playing on line 3 or 4. He'll be put in a position where he actually has a chance to succeed. Let's see where training camp goes. If he brings it during camp, maybe he gets an NHL spot. If it turns out he's not ready, send him back down after 9 games (or fewer). But let him see what he needs to work on. Edited August 28, 2017 by Doohickie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 If he's here, he's not playing on line 3 or 4. He'll be put in a position where he actually has a chance to succeed. I don't think he's going to be here. Not until we find a way to shed Moulson. Because Moulson ain't gonna sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Sure. Ya, it was just a guess at the lineup. I dont think it's gonna go 23 for 23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 If he's here, he's not playing on line 3 or 4. He'll be put in a position where he actually has a chance to succeed. You can be in a position to succeed on the 3rd line. That's where Matthews started out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 (edited) I don't think he's going to be here. Not until we find a way to shed Moulson. Because Moulson ain't gonna sit. Maybe, but Moulson is here for another 2 years. The time will come when he sits, if he's not one of the 4 best LWs. We can't afford to throw away his spot for 2 more full seasons, when playoffs are the mandate. You can be in a position to succeed on the 3rd line. That's where Matthews started out Different situation. Matthews was the driver on line 3 and had the ability to be so. I'd love to see Reinhart get his own line, on line 3. Nylander can't carry a line and won't succeed with the likes of Larsson for a C, at this point. He needs to play on a more talented line. Edited August 28, 2017 by Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Maybe, but Moulson is here for another 2 years. The time will come when he sits, if he's not one of the 4 best LWs. Different situation. Matthews was the driver on line 3 and had the ability to be so. I'd love to see Reinhart get his own line, on line 3. Nylander can't carry a line and won't succeed with the likes of Larsson for a C, at this point. He needs to play on a more talented line. I get what you're saying, but what I'm getting out of it is Matthews is a better player, so they put him on the 3rd line, whereas Nylander isn't, so they put him on the top line; he'll have more help, but against a lot tougher competition, especially on RoR's line. We can't put him with Jack, as Nylander is no doubt awful in his own end, and Eichel isn't exactly a Selke candidate yet I'm just not willing to sacrifice wins to help Nylander. If he's up here, I'm perfectly fine with him on the 3rd line. Otherwise, keep him in Rochester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Nylander will have to show that he can be a passable AHL player before he gets an extended stay here, he hasn't shown it yet. Unless he absolutely blows the doors off this camp, but he couldn't even do that in 3v3 prospect scrimmages a month and a half ago soooooo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 But you don't have to sort your 4 lines by most talented players, top to bottom, line 1 through 4. More balance can be achieved. Just because Nylander isn't capable of being the best player on his own line, doesn't mean he doesn't have to ability to be an effective complementary winger to a centre like ROR. Sure, but it doesn't matter. He's not going to be here unless we find a way to get rid of Moulson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 I get what you're saying, but what I'm getting out of it is Matthews is a better player, so they put him on the 3rd line, whereas Nylander isn't, so they put him on the top line; he'll have more help, but against a lot tougher competition, especially on RoR's line. We can't put him with Jack, as Nylander is no doubt awful in his own end, and Eichel isn't exactly a Selke candidate yet I'm just not willing to sacrifice wins to help Nylander. If he's up here, I'm perfectly fine with him on the 3rd line. Otherwise, keep him in Rochester But you don't have to sort your 4 lines by most talented players, top to bottom, line 1 through 4. More balance can be achieved. Just because Nylander isn't capable of being the best player on his own line, doesn't mean he doesn't have to ability to be an effective complementary winger to a centre like ROR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 But you don't have to sort your 4 lines by most talented players, top to bottom, line 1 through 4. More balance can be achieved. Just because Nylander isn't capable of being the best player on his own line, doesn't mean he doesn't have to ability to be an effective complementary winger to a centre like ROR. I agree with that, which is why I want Reinhart on the 3rd line. Regardless though Eichel and RoR's line will get more minutes and tougher assignments because of those two players. Putting Nylander on either of those lines just makes his adjustment harder IMO, and it makes us lose more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Sure, but it doesn't matter. He's not going to be here unless we find a way to get rid of Moulson. If the options are, A: Moulson plays, to our detriment as a team, for 2 more full seasons, or B: He's traded, I don't agree. Benching him or sending him to Rochester are an option. We aren't going to be able to trade him, so if he's necessarily in the lineup for 2 more seasons, we're kinda screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 If the options are, A: Moulson plays, to our detriment as a team, for 2 more full seasons, or B: He's traded, I don't agree. Benching him or sending him to Rochester are an option. We aren't going to be able to trade him, so if he's necessarily in the lineup for 2 more seasons, we're kinda screwed. Is sending him to Rochester even an option? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Is sending him to Rochester even an option? It is. I suppose it might hurt Moulson's feelings, but it's a viable option short of that. I agree with that, which is why I want Reinhart on the 3rd line. Regardless though Eichel and RoR's line will get more minutes and tougher assignments because of those two players. Putting Nylander on either of those lines just makes his adjustment harder IMO, and it makes us lose more. I just don't think Nylander necessarily has to start on the 3rd or 4th line. Or any rookie for that matter, IF they are ready to play. We want to put these guys in a spot to succeed. We b*tched to no end when Reinhart was being played on line 4. The question is if Nylander is ready for the NHL this year. Certainly a big if. But if he's able to play in the NHL, I think he'll be most effective playing with our other high-skill guys. If Reinhart is moved to Centre, I'd be more than happy with a Kane - Reinhart - Nylander line. But I don't want Nylander anywhere near the likes of Larsson, Josefson, or Girgensons for his centreman right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 It is. I suppose it might hurt Moulson's feelings, but it's a viable option short of that. I just don't think Nylander necessarily has to start on the 3rd or 4th line. Or any rookie for that matter, IF they are ready to play. We want to put these guys in a spot to succeed. We b*tched to no end when Reinhart was being played on line 4. The question is if Nylander is ready for the NHL this year. Certainly a big if. But if he's able to play in the NHL, I think he'll be most effective playing with our other high-skill guys. We'd be paying him $5 mil in salary this year and we'd still be stuck with his $5 mil cap hit, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 (edited) We'd be paying him $5 mil in salary this year and we'd still be stuck with his $5 mil cap hit, right? Yup I think so. But two wrongs don't make a right, right? I'd rather pay him and not have him dragging a line down, than pay him AND have him drag a line down. Edit: That only really works if the guy stepping in for your over-priced AHL bound vet comes on the cheap. Luckily that certainly would be the case with Nylander. All bets are off if Nylander shows in camp he's not ready for the big-time. In that scenario, Moulson very well may be the only option. I can't see that being the case in the 18/19 season, however, so I think it's highly likely Moulson is buried at that point, if not this season. -- My guess sans Nylander: Kane - O'Reilly - Okposo Pouliot - Eichel - Reinhart Girgensons - Larsson - Pominville Moulson - Josefson - Bailey Edited August 28, 2017 by Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Alright, so I live in the Houston area and have been more involved with watching this Astros this summer than I have been with paying attention to the Sabres. I've seen the additions we've made (Scandella, Pominville, Beaulieu and Antipin) and the (hopefully steal of the draft) Casey Mittlestadt. Obviously Mittlestadt won't be in Buffalo this season, but what is the projected lineup looking like right now? Basically I know about the additions the team has made but I don't know how that affects the lineup. Kane-Eichel-Reinhart Pouliot-O'Reilly-Okposo Girgensons-Larsson-Pominville --Who cares-- Scandella-Risto Beaulieu-Antipin McCabe-Bogo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erickompositör72 Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 There's always the really-off-chance that Housley's system creates a whole new attacking offensive style that allows Moulson to find some of his old form. Moulson hurt us a lot, IMO, because he was too slow to attack in Bylsma's system, and he was not strong in the corners and not strong on the puck. If we truly have a 5-man attack, that might put less pressure on Moulson's weaknesses and allow him to do what he is good at: get open and shoot, or clean up garbage in front of the net. Just a thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Just a thought... That is my hope. I'd like for him to break out of this multi-year slump and show he was almost worth the money he is being paid. Last year was a stepping stone, but he'd need to at least double his output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Based on what I saw last season, I predict that the order of "NHL readiness" of the Rochester guys goes: Baptiste, Rodrigues, Bailey, Nylander. Maybe some of them flip around but I bet we keep 2 of them. My big thing with Moulson is that the skillsets of his that eroded (and some of which weren't good to begin with, like skating) are not things that will be masked by system changes. Players who can't skate at an NHL level simply can't stick in the NHL with any capacity. Griffin Reinhart actually has decent defending abilities but he can't put himself in position to use them, and so he's an AHL player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 It is. I suppose it might hurt Moulson's feelings, but it's a viable option short of that. I just don't think Nylander necessarily has to start on the 3rd or 4th line. Or any rookie for that matter, IF they are ready to play. We want to put these guys in a spot to succeed. We b*tched to no end when Reinhart was being played on line 4. The question is if Nylander is ready for the NHL this year. Certainly a big if. But if he's able to play in the NHL, I think he'll be most effective playing with our other high-skill guys. If Reinhart is moved to Centre, I'd be more than happy with a Kane - Reinhart - Nylander line. But I don't want Nylander anywhere near the likes of Larsson, Josefson, or Girgensons for his centreman right now. I think there's a big difference between NHL ready and NHL effective. Nylander can play in the NHL, just not in a pivotal role Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogre Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 I think there's a big difference between NHL ready and NHL effective. Nylander can play in the NHL, just not in a pivotal role Bingo! We have a winner! Let's give the kid some time for his berries to drop. He will play in the NHL and be good I think. I just don't see him being a big part of this team for a year or two yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted August 29, 2017 Report Share Posted August 29, 2017 (edited) Based on what I saw last season, I predict that the order of "NHL readiness" of the Rochester guys goes: Baptiste, Rodrigues, Bailey, Nylander. Maybe some of them flip around but I bet we keep 2 of them. My big thing with Moulson is that the skillsets of his that eroded (and some of which weren't good to begin with, like skating) are not things that will be masked by system changes. Players who can't skate at an NHL level simply can't stick in the NHL with any capacity. Griffin Reinhart actually has decent defending abilities but he can't put himself in position to use them, and so he's an AHL player. Agreed. Speaking of the Reinharts, is Sam's skating good enough? I think there's a big difference between NHL ready and NHL effective. Nylander can play in the NHL, just not in a pivotal role Right. I just don't think being asked to be the third best, complimentary player on a line is a pivotal role. Edited August 29, 2017 by Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted August 29, 2017 Report Share Posted August 29, 2017 Agreed. Speaking of the Reinharts, is Sam's skating good enough? Right. I just don't think being asked to be the third best, complimentary player on a line is a pivotal role. Sam's skating is definitely good enough to be an NHL player, because of his vision/IQ. If he was lacking in those areas, I doubt he's an NHLer, but he excels at them. It's some amount below average, but ultimately playing his style with the right wingers can likely make that fairly irrelevant. Griffin makes Sam look like McDavid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts