Jump to content

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This season is a 56 game playoff for the Sabres.  Yes I may be over reacting to one game, but he didn’t react well to his first real challenge.  I’m concerned he isn’t ready for the physical challenge that is the NHL and don’t want to go down the Mitts road again.

 

As "bad" as he was, he made a great play late in the 2nd to send Byram in clean and that play bounced off the post.  He also put a shot just wide w/ ~8 minutes left.  He was that close to being the hero.

IMHO, you aren't just possibly overreacting, but actually are.  😉

Edited by Taro T
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This season is a 56 game playoff for the Sabres.  Yes I may be over reacting to one game, but he didn’t react well to his first real challenge.  I’m concerned he isn’t ready for the physical challenge that is the NHL and don’t want to go down the Mitts road again.

 

Don't let the Mitts syndrome influence how you would handle Cozens. They are completely two different players and people. Cozens is more mature and physically developed compared to Mitts when he first played in the NHL. Cozens is also more ready to play a two way game then Mitts was when he got early playing time. This is my impression (not necessarily true) but I believe that Cozens has a greater level of maturity where he could handle setbacks than Mitts could.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He had a great tournament until the biggest game of his young life.  He played on the perimeter to much and seemed to be missing the aggression he exhibited earlier in the tourney against weaker opponents.

Now we are asking him to be that power forward in the biggest toughest league in the world.  My honest assessment is that like Mitts before him, he isn't physically ready for the NHL.  He honestly looks like he needs 15-20 lbs more to play his game in the NHL.  '

That may not mean he won’t be effective in another role, but I'm thinking he would be better off developing another year away from the NHL.

What would reply to someone who points out all of the other important games where Cozens has performed well?  Framing this game as the first real challenge that Cozens has faced is laughable.

Perhaps you are putting way too much emphasis on one game?

I think those would be relevant things to consider.  

Edited by Curt
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Don't let the Mitts syndrome influence how you would handle Cozens. They are completely two different players and people. Cozens is more mature and physically developed compared to Mitts when he first played in the NHL. Cozens is also more ready to play a two way game then Mitts was when he got early playing time. This is my impression (not necessarily true) but I believe that Cozens has a greater level of maturity where he could handle setbacks than Mitts could.

Cozens should always have been on track to start the year in the mix for 4th line (3rd scoring line).  Saying he should start the year as Staal's winger or not even get an in game look are both misguided IMHO.

But playing Cozens on a sheltered line isn't setting him up for "Mitts syndrome."  Playing him on Staal's line out of the gate or in Staal's role is how they set him up for failure.  Mittelstadt wouldn't have "failed" if not put into roles he couldn't reasonably be expected to succeed at.  Again, IMHO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

If Cozens had had that game in game 1, and then gone on to win gold, NO ONE would be questioning anything. 

Canada got out-coached by a superior US game plan. 

You may be right.  Canada as a team faced adversity for the first time and crumbled.  However I expected Cozens to step up when faced with that adversity and he didn’t, thus creating my concerns.

None of this has changed my longterm view of him as a player, but it raised doubts as to his readiness this year.

Risto and his Golden Goal occurred after he was already playing in the A and before his NHL call up. He was a man among boys in that tourney and in the A.  I don’t think it will harm Cozens to start in the A 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thst gold medal game could have gone either way.  Canada outshot the US, one could even argue they out chanced them as well.   

Zegras finds himself on the end of a lucky bounce to put the Americans up 2-0.   Canada hits iron, narrowly misses some prime scoring chances losing a close one.

That's hockey.

I thought Cozens looked fine, he generated some chances and played a 200ft game, don't damn him to hell because they lost the game, my god.  He was the leading scorer for much of the tournament.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Cozens should always have been on track to start the year in the mix for 4th line (3rd scoring line).  Saying he should start the year as Staal's winger or not even get an in game look are both misguided IMHO.

But playing Cozens on a sheltered line isn't setting him up for "Mitts syndrome."  Playing him on Staal's line out of the gate or in Staal's role is how they set him up for failure.  Mittelstadt wouldn't have "failed" if not put into roles he couldn't reasonably be expected to succeed at.  Again, IMHO.

Your response is well reasoned but I disagree with it especially as it relates to Mitts. My take on Mitts is that he simply wasn't ready to play in the NHL even at a lower line. He simply wasn't physically ready and equipped at that point to compete and play the more rugged two way game. When he left college he should have been sent to the AHL and given a lot of playing time to work on his game. While in the NHL he was a boy in a man's league. 

I don't have the same concern with Cozens. Although he is not fully physically developed he is developed enough to play against NHL players. I also believe that Cozens is more mature at this point than Casey was and because of that maturity beyond his young years he can handle the struggles that he will inevitably face.  I agree with you that he should start on a lower line and allow him to work his way up the ranks if he can. My general point is that Cozens and Mitt situations are very different and should be handled differently. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be over simplifying this but you will not know if he is ready unless you play him.

At a minimum he should get a few games and be on the taxi squad if he is on the bubble. He isn’t fully developed yet but he is relatively big as well as one of the faster players in his peer group.

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Your response is well reasoned but I disagree with it especially as it relates to Mitts. My take on Mitts is that he simply wasn't ready to play in the NHL even at a lower line. He simply wasn't physically ready and equipped at that point to compete and play the more rugged two way game. When he left college he should have been sent to the AHL and given a lot of playing time to work on his game. While in the NHL he was a boy in a man's league. 

I don't have the same concern with Cozens. Although he is not fully physically developed he is developed enough to play against NHL players. I also believe that Cozens is more mature at this point than Casey was and because of that maturity beyond his young years he can handle the struggles that he will inevitably face.  I agree with you that he should start on a lower line and allow him to work his way up the ranks if he can. My general point is that Cozens and Mitt situations are very different and should be handled differently. 

It's fine.  We can agree to disagree.

But Mitts had 5 points in 6 games in his very short stint after college.  He wasn't in over his head when sheltered like that.  He spent WAY too much time as the 2C that next year and as such spent way too much time looking like a golden retriever puppy - where's the ball, where's the ball, where's the ball, where's the treat, where's the treat.  Getting to be going against easier lines should've cut down on that happening & it didn't need to be AHLers prior to his confidence getting shot.  IMHO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be entirely wrong to decide Cozens readiness based on one game (one where he was merely OK after six stellar outings)

His play over the past year seems to indicate he is ready to take the next step.

His play over the next month will show whether or not he is.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Taro T said:

It's fine.  We can agree to disagree.

But Mitts had 5 points in 6 games in his very short stint after college.  He wasn't in over his head when sheltered like that.  He spent WAY too much time as the 2C that next year and as such spent way too much time looking like a golden retriever puppy - where's the ball, where's the ball, where's the ball, where's the treat, where's the treat.  Getting to be going against easier lines should've cut down on that happening & it didn't need to be AHLers prior to his confidence getting shot.  IMHO.

In general our positions are not much different yet slightly different. Where I have a nuanced difference is that there is a stylistic difference in play between the lower lines and the top two lines. To an extent the lower lines play a tighter, more physical and grinding style of play. In my opinion Mitts wasn't ready for that style of play. Maybe he is more ready now than before. I hope so. I'm rooting for him to succeed. But where I do believe that Cozens can handle a lower line now and I didn't see Mitts having the required traits at that point to handle the rigors of a lower line when he first played in the league.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Curt said:

Lol.  It was kind of a joke.  I was making it out like that small grammar error was the most relevant thing in his post.

Because the idea that Cozens had one kinda bad game in an otherwise dominate tournament, after a dominant WHL season, after a really good WJC tournament last season where he was really good in the gold metal game, that means he definitely isn’t ready for the NHL.

It’s absolutely absurd.

Agreed 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

In general our positions are not much different yet slightly different. Where I have a nuanced difference is that there is a stylistic difference in play between the lower lines and the top two lines. To an extent the lower lines play a tighter, more physical and grinding style of play. In my opinion Mitts wasn't ready for that style of play. Maybe he is more ready now than before. I hope so. I'm rooting for him to succeed. But where I do believe that Cozens can handle a lower line now and I didn't see Mitts having the required traits at that point to handle the rigors of a lower line when he first played in the league.  

Except, how the bottom 2 lines play is dictated by personnel and nothing higher than that.  Bavk in the post-lockout hey day, the 3rd line was a true 3rd scoring line and the 4th line was an energy line.  That worked because the 2nd scoring line was also the checking line.

Tampa Bay's 3rd line truly is a scoring line when their forwards are healthy because they have the personnel to pull it off.  It wasn't strictly a checking line.  Should Krueger like the matches on a given night, the Sabres could put out a kid version of that for the 4th line. 

It's clear that the former 4th line (true checking line) will officially be the 3rd line rather than just actually the 3rd line.  So, that 4th line can be ostensibly a 3rd scoring line.  And that nominal 3rd line during Mittelstadt's 2 seasons should have both: 1 had him on it (true last season primarily, but not the year earlier when his play stagnated); and 2 been a 3rd scoring line getting sheltered minutes.  It kind of was last year, but the 2nd line being so broken didn't fully allow for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Except, how the bottom 2 lines play is dictated by personnel and nothing higher than that.  Bavk in the post-lockout hey day, the 3rd line was a true 3rd scoring line and the 4th line was an energy line.  That worked because the 2nd scoring line was also the checking line.

Tampa Bay's 3rd line truly is a scoring line when their forwards are healthy because they have the personnel to pull it off.  It wasn't strictly a checking line.  Should Krueger like the matches on a given night, the Sabres could put out a kid version of that for the 4th line. 

It's clear that the former 4th line (true checking line) will officially be the 3rd line rather than just actually the 3rd line.  So, that 4th line can be ostensibly a 3rd scoring line.  And that nominal 3rd line during Mittelstadt's 2 seasons should have both: 1 had him on it (true last season primarily, but not the year earlier when his play stagnated); and 2 been a 3rd scoring line getting sheltered minutes.  It kind of was last year, but the 2nd line being so broken didn't fully allow for it.

I won't belabor the points that we have already discussed about Mitts in comparison to Cozens. What I do believe is that the best thing to happen to Mitts that advanced his game is playing in the AHL. I just think that Cozens is more advanced than Mitts was at this stage of play and can even contribute in his inaugural NHL season. I agree with you that Mitts wasn't properly handled but I disagree with you on the point that Mitts was ready to play in the NHL in his first season. I understand what you are saying but I'm not fully receptive to it. This is what one would call a friendly disagreement. 🍺 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I won't belabor the points that we have already discussed about Mitts in comparison to Cozens. What I do believe is that the best thing to happen to Mitts that advanced his game is playing in the AHL. I just think that Cozens is more advanced than Mitts was at this stage of play and can even contribute in his inaugural NHL season. I agree with you that Mitts wasn't properly handled but I disagree with you on the point that Mitts was ready to play in the NHL in his first season. I understand what you are saying but I'm not fully receptive to it. This is what one would call a friendly disagreement. 🍺 

We agree even more than you realize because while Mittelstadt SHOULD have been in the NHL that 1st year as he was, though in a sheltered role; sending him down to the AHL had become the correct thing when it finally happened.  😉

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, inkman said:

Nobody polices grammar like me on this forum and I think this is a little much.  Every third post on this forum has grammar issues.  Rather than being a doosh, I just move on with my day.  Clearly you aren’t triggered by the “then” “than” issue which i estimate 60% of posters get wrong every time.  

You are suppose to capitalize "I" 😉 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

People like to look at the World Juniors because of the giant spotlight, but it's such a small sample size. Look at what Cozens and Mitts did in their D+1 seasons.

Mittelstadt had a very pedestrian 30pts in 34 games in the NCAA. The NHLe calculator I used translates this to 24pts in the NHL which is pretty much replacement level for a forward.

Cozens dominated the WHL with 85 points in 51 games in his D+1 year. The NHLe shows this to be 41pts which is without question a contributing F. 

NHLe isn't perfect, but Mitts did not play well enough at Minnesota to justify moving on. The team was just gun shy leaving him simmer in the NCAA and risk losing as they did with Cal Petersen (and Jimmy Vesey).

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Curt said:

You used the wrong too in the second sentence.

And Cozens is ready to play in the NHL.

Brian Burke doesn’t think so. He said so today on Hockey central podcast 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...