When does this team learn to win?

[Weave]

6 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

We don’t lack vets.  Up front KO is nearing 900 games, Skinner over 800, Z is in his 8th season and Eakin is nearing 700 games.   Vinnie is in his 7th season. On the back end Pysyk is in his 10th season and Miller his 7th.  Anderson has played in over 650 NHL games over 19 seasons.  We have the wrong vets.

What we are missing in leaders who know how to play winning NHL hockey.  Tuch is the playoff leader on this team with 66 playoffs games.  Eakin is second at 50 and Anderson 48.  Skinner has never reached the playoffs.  KO has only played in 24, Pysyk 4.  I think Tuch is the only guy on this team that truly knows what a winning effort looks like.  Tuch’s presence has already evaluated Thompson.  

Of the vets listed odds are that only KO, Skinner and Z will be returning.  We need to supplement them with vets who have Cup experience and command respect in the dressing room.  That’s where a goalie like Quick and a D like Orlov come in.  Guys who understand winning and will hold the kids accountable.   

We absolutely do lack vets.  Look at the number of vets on the other teams.  We have less than 1 vet for every one player under 25.  No other team in the league supports as many kids with so few vets.

And absolutely, 100% agree, at least half the vets we do have are the wrong ones. I addressed that in my comment about Eakin, Butcher, and the goalies.

Edited February 28, 2022 by Weave

[GASabresIUFAN]

10 minutes ago, Weave said:

We absolutely do lack vets.  Look at the number of vets on the other teams.  We have less than 1 vet for every one player under 25.  No other team in the league supports as many kids with so few vets.

And absolutely, 100% agree, at least half the vets we do have are the wrong ones.

When Chicago won their 1st Cup they only had 7 players over 25.  Kane was 20 and Toews 21.  Each rebuild is different, but one of the keys for Chicago was the playoff experience of Hossa and Campbell to go with the talent of Kane and Toews. 

Tuch is the first such guy for us.  We need more.

Edited February 28, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[bunomatic]

Right now the only trophies KA and Meatballs are interested in are in the form of draft capital. When they have every first overall pick they can possibly hoard they’ll ask the team to start winning.

[PickaPecaPickles]

1 hour ago, klos1963 said:

So our goalies would be good enough if they just stayed healthy? Come on. No team wanted any of these goalies on their roster, just us.  UPL is the only one that may have made in impact, but even that was asking a lot.

You misinterpreted that.  11 said "when it gets a good goalie."  I simply added that he (the good goalie they get) needs to stay healthy too, given how many injuries Sabres goalies have experienced the past couple years.

[jad1]

15 minutes ago, bunomatic said:

Right now the only trophies KA and Meatballs are interested in are in the form of draft capital. When they have every first overall pick they can possibly hoard they’ll ask the team to start winning.

For the Sabres, the Stanley Cup has been replaced by the draft lottery.  Been that way for years.

[Indabuff]

Whenever the hell this organization gets their collective head out of their ass.  

[Weave]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

When Chicago won their 1st Cup they only had 7 players over 25.  Kane was 20 and Toews 21.  Each rebuild is different, but one of the keys for Chicago was the playoff experience of Hossa and Campbell to go with the talent of Kane and Toews. 

Tuch is the first such guy for us.  We need more.

And Chicago was an outlier.  You can’t plan to succeed with an outlier strategy 

[Pimlach]

12 hours ago, bunomatic said:

Right now the only trophies KA and Meatballs are interested in are in the form of draft capital. When they have every first overall pick they can possibly hoard they’ll ask the team to start winning.

Building through draft and development is smart but Asking a bunch of young players to start winning isn’t a sound idea.  Teaching them to win is.  Mix in few vets with playoff experience.  As the league gets watered down with more teams this gets harder to do.  The right vets have to want to come here - winning breeds winning. 
 

[bunomatic]

49 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Building through draft and development is smart but Asking a bunch of young players to start winning isn’t a sound idea.  Teaching them to win is.  Mix in few vets with playoff experience.  As the league gets watered down with more teams this gets harder to do.  The right vets have to want to come here - winning breeds winning. 
 

Yup. I don’t agree with the team when they say winning doesn’t matter. Winning should always be the goal for the coach and the team even if your GM says otherwise, even if you are incapable due to ***** ownership and mismanagement. My post was more about team managements attitude towards the lack of importance of winning. I’m no wordsmith, i guess it fell flat.

[Taro T]

3 hours ago, bunomatic said:

Yup. I don’t agree with the team when they say winning doesn’t matter. Winning should always be the goal for the coach and the team even if your GM says otherwise, even if you are incapable due to ***** ownership and mismanagement. My post was more about team managements attitude towards the lack of importance of winning. I’m no wordsmith, i guess it fell flat.

Absolutely agree that it is bad that the team publicly states development is the focus this year which implicitly puts winning in a lesser role as a goal.  But, considering it is as obvious as the sun rising in the east that this team wanted to be in on Wright & other top end guys this year, they can't really say otherwise or else they have to can the coach at the end of the year.  If winning is a priority NOW, then Granato has failed.  And Adams isn't going there.

Sounding like a broken record, but the fear is the team wants to be in the Bedard sweepstakes next year as well.  Hoping that's just the realist getting overridden by the pessimist, but until they show by actions (improved goaltending, 2 vet RHD that are actually good at hockey, another vet F also good at hockey being brought in) that winning is now the goal and bottom 6 finishes are no longer acceptable, they are.

[JohnC]

59 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Absolutely agree that it is bad that the team publicly states development is the focus this year which implicitly puts winning in a lesser role as a goal.  But, considering it is as obvious as the sun rising in the east that this team wanted to be in on Wright & other top end guys this year, they can't really say otherwise or else they have to can the coach at the end of the year.  If winning is a priority NOW, then Granato has failed.  And Adams isn't going there.

Sounding like a broken record, but the fear is the team wants to be in the Bedard sweepstakes next year as well.  Hoping that's just the realist getting overridden by the pessimist, but until they show by actions (improved goaltending, 2 vet RHD that are actually good at hockey, another vet F also good at hockey being brought in) that winning is now the goal and bottom 6 finishes are no longer acceptable, they are.

With respect to the highlighted section the needs that you list that should and could be addressed this offseason are doable. Considering our grand cap room and the abundant draft capital this franchise has for the next two years this franchise has the wherewithal to address the need list that you noted. And all that can be done and still stay within the strategy of mostly building through the draft. 

I also apologize for my repetitive responses. But my juices get activated because I strongly believe that systemic losing is corrosive to the players and the organization. Just ask yourself when was the last time that this franchise played meaningful games entering the last third part of the season? This year the Sabres had no impacting games after the first dozen games. And that is sad. 

 

[CallawaySabres]

14 games in March and I see MAYBE 3 wins out of those team. One thing is for sure, they will NOT be learning how to win next month.

[GASabresIUFAN]

17 hours ago, Weave said:

And Chicago was an outlier.  You can’t plan to succeed with an outlier strategy 

I'm not so sure.  I went and looked at the average age stats from 2018-19 and the three youngest teams were Buffalo, Colorado and Carolina.  Today 2/3 of those teams are at the top of the NHL standings.  It looks like they allowed their kids to grow together and then supplemented to fill roster holes.  Obviously their rebuilds worked and ours didn't.  I think this is KA's strategy.  I'm hopeful that KA will use this off-season and his considerable cap room to start filling roster holes not filled with players in our system.  

Even our good teams in 2005/05 and 2006/07 were build mostly on the backs of our draft picks and developed players.  Miller, Biron, Noronen, Max, Kotalik, McKee, Vanek, Roy, Campbell, Kalinin, Gaustad, Peters, Novotny and Paille were all Sabres picks.  Outside talent was under 25 like Connolly and Pyatt or in the middle of their prime like Briere, Drury, Lydman, Dumont, and Hecht.  Only 30+ players were Grier and Numminen.  In fact, the Sabres, according to Elite Prospects, they were the 2nd youngest team that season at 25.91.  Amazingly they were even younger the next season at 25.62.

I don't think the number of vets really matter.  It's having the right vets and the right leadership to insure accountability who set a standard that losing is un-acceptable.  We haven't had that since Drury left town.  Maybe Tuch resets that standard here.

Edited February 28, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[Gatorman0519]

2 More Tuchs, a starting goalie, a quality veteran defenseman, and hope the kids are ready.... that gets us to .500 next year and hopefully an upward trajectory thereafter. It will be years until we can challenge. 

[Weave]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I'm not so sure.  I went and looked at the average age stats from 2018-19 and the three youngest teams were Buffalo, Colorado and Carolina.  Today 2/3 of those teams are at the top of the NHL standings.  It looks like they allowed their kids to grow together and then supplemented to fill roster holes.  Obviously their rebuilds worked and ours didn't.  I think this is KA's strategy.  I'm hopeful that KA will use this off-season and his considerable cap room to start filling roster holes not filled with players in our system.  

Even our good teams in 2005/05 and 2006/07 were build mostly on the backs of our draft picks and developed players.  Miller, Biron, Noronen, Max, Kotalik, McKee, Vanek, Roy, Campbell, Kalinin, Gaustad, Peters, Novotny and Paille were all Sabres picks.  Outside talent was under 25 like Connolly and Pyatt or in the middle of their prime like Briere, Drury, Lydman, Dumont, and Hecht.  Only 30+ players were Grier and Numminen.  In fact, the Sabres, according to Elite Prospects, they were the 2nd youngest team that season at 25.91.  Amazingly they were even younger the next season at 25.62.

I don't think the number of vets really matter.  It's having the right vets and the right leadership to insure accountability who set a standard that losing is un-acceptable.  We haven't had that since Drury left town.  Maybe Tuch resets that standard here.

I posted the numbers for you already.  Neither Col nor Car left so many kids with so few vets.

[Claude Balls]

All of the above

[mjd1001]

When they score a lot more and have players good enough to do that year after year.

I just took a look at the top 5 teams in the league now in terms of points/point percentage:

-Colorado:  5 players averaging more than a point per game...3 of them averaging more than 1.3 points per game

-Carolina:  4 players averaging over .9 points per game.

-Florida: 4 players average over 1 point per game (Huberdea at 1.42)

-Tampa:  3 players over 1 point per game...a 4th at .97 points per game.

-Toronto: 4 players over .9 points per game, Matthews on a 62 goal per 82 game pace.

 

What does Buffalo have now? Tuch averageing 1 point per game (over 22 games). No one else even in the .9 range...only one player (Tage) barely holding onto .8.

You need 3-4 guys at least to produce at the same level Tuch is so far, but to do it over 82 games.

It goes beyond that.  We LOVE what Thompson is doing, and Skinner to a certain extent. But there are 34 players with the same number of goals or more than Thompson, and 48 with the same number or more than Skinner.

Sure, this team needs a good starting goaltender, I almost don't bring that up because it is so obvious. But for them to start winning, they need some players to develop a LOT more production.  When you look at the better teams in the league, what the Sabres have in terms of production is way down the list.

 

The top teams in the league are on pace for 320-340 goals for the season.  Scoring is up. The Sabres are currently on pace for 217.  I want to see this team find 80 more goals per year (full season), that is the starting point for when I will consider them good on a consistent basis.

"learning to win" can just be being able to put away that one goal lead in the 3rd period and not blow it.  But if you score like a top team in the league, you are going to 'learn to win' by simply being in a better position to win more games because of your scoring.

Edited February 28, 2022 by mjd1001

[GASabresIUFAN]

28 minutes ago, Weave said:

I posted the numbers for you already.  Neither Col nor Car left so many kids with so few vets.

Carolina in 2019 had the same number of vets we have now, except their vets were 26 and 27 and many were home grown.  Only 3 players on their roster were over 28; Williams (36), McElhinney (35) and Staal, J (29).

Again, the answer to the question is having the right veterans, not just a large number of vets.  

Edited February 28, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[Curt]

My thought for today is that in order to succeed, this team needs to develop a culture of togetherness and also continue adding good, skilled players.

In order to do that I believe that they really do need players who want to be here (even if it is becoming a played out phrase).  Overpaying a vet and getting him to come to Buffalo just because he felt like he couldn’t turn down the money is not going to be what fixes this team.  Mercenaries aren’t the answer.

Almost all of the improvements are going to come internally or if they can be lucky enough to find more veteran players like Tuch/Okposo who are both good and passionate about being in Buffalo.

I just feel like it’s important to keep this team extremely tight and together for the next 2-3 years.  They need to develop the attitude of caring about and playing for the guy next to you.  I think that’s what will drag this team out of the abyss.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Carolina in 2019 had the same number of vets we have now, except their vets were 26 and 27 and many were home grown.  Only 3 players on their roster were over 28; Williams (36), McElhinney (35) and Staal, J (29).

Again, the answer to the question is having the right veterans, not just a large number of vets.  

I hate that internet conversations are so damned digital.  On at least two occassions I said that our vets were not the right ones, and it contributes to the problem. Of course we need the right vets.  Saying we need the right players isn't profound, and its certainly not very debatable.  You still need enough of them to make sure the kids aren't overwhelmed by their experiences.  And I think its about as obvious as a sunrise that our kids have been overwhelmed because they haven't had enough support around them.  And yes, that means the right support, not just lots of it.

[GASabresIUFAN]

20 minutes ago, Weave said:

I hate that internet conversations are so damned digital.  On at least two occassions I said that our vets were not the right ones, and it contributes to the problem. Of course we need the right vets.  Saying we need the right players isn't profound, and its certainly not very debatable.  You still need enough of them to make sure the kids aren't overwhelmed by their experiences.  And I think its about as obvious as a sunrise that our kids have been overwhelmed because they haven't had enough support around them.  And yes, that means the right support, not just lots of it.

I think we generally agree that vets like Eakin, Hayden, Anderson, Miller, Hagg and even Girgensons aren't the right guys to move this team forward.  Skinner, Tuch and KO seem like the only ones delivering the right message on and off the ice.  

Truth be told, there will probably even less veteran presence on next year's team as Power, Quinn, Krebs, Samuelsson, UPL and possibly others become full time NHLers.  So it makes it more imperative then ever for KA to make good decisions on how to get the Sabres cap compliant next season with vet who are proven winners.

I think where we basically disagree is quantity of outside help.  From my research the best teams seem primarily home grown.  However even on successful teams home grown players can range for kids to vets.  In 2005/06 the Sabres picks on the team ranged from the 1995 draft (McKee and Biron) to the 2003 draft (Vanek).  Only 1996 wasn't represented.  

Edited March 1, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[Weave]

6 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I think we generally agree that vets like Eakin, Hayden, Anderson, Miller, Hagg and even Girgensons aren't the right guys to move this team forward.  Skinner, Tuch and KO seem like the only ones delivering the right message on and off the ice.  

Truth be told, there will probably even less veteran presence on next year's team as Power, Quinn, Krebs, Samuelsson, UPL and possibly others become full time NHLers.  So it makes it more imperative then ever for KA to make good decisions on how to get the Sabres cap compliant next season with vet who are proven winners.

And IMO that will be a mistake.  I think we have reached a point where team management needs to start selecting young players that aren't going to be difference makers and move them out.   They are diluting the development and exposure of the ones we need to hit their ceilings.

It's like a classroom with 1 teacher and 40 kids.

[Taro T]

13 minutes ago, Weave said:

And IMO that will be a mistake.  I think we have reached a point where team management needs to start selecting young players that aren't going to be difference makers and move them out.   They are diluting the development and exposure of the ones we need to hit their ceilings.

It's like a classroom with 1 teacher and 40 kids.

Yup.  100% on the same page.  As said in some other thread (they all blend together it seems) they can improve the roster now (this off-season, whatever) by trading some of the prospects that are getting passed by their piers that there won't be room for (possibly w/ a 2nd rounder) that some other team that actually has a more traditionally constructed team, especially 1 close to the cap, might have room for especially w/ him bringing NHL level play & room for growth on the cheap.

And, am expecting they'll need 1 more vet forward than they'd hope to bring in because with his injury history, though my expectation is he'll be back, Girgensons can't be relied on.  Build a team w/ him penciled in as F13 & if he can play it's a bonus.  If not, they're covered.

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

And IMO that will be a mistake.  I think we have reached a point where team management needs to start selecting young players that aren't going to be difference makers and move them out.   They are diluting the development and exposure of the ones we need to hit their ceilings.

It's like a classroom with 1 teacher and 40 kids.

I have no problem beginning to prune and it may happen.  I don't see Bryson, Fitzgerald,. Asplund or Olofsson as long term pieces.  Who do you want to prune?  Last year everyone would have said we could probably  prune Thompson and Jokiharju.  Oops. 

Good analogy, but I think the ratio will more likely be 8 to 13 vets to younger players.  Each forward like will have least one vet (Skinner, Okposo, Tuch and Girgensons), On the backend KA is going to add a veteran goaltender and at least two veteran D just to get us cap complaint.  He'll also likely add a 4th line center.  

I think the roster will look something like this 

Vets - 8 - Girgensons (500+ games), Okposo (900 games), Skinner (850 games), Tuch (300 games) plus 4th line center, 2 veteran D and 1 vet goalie

Some NHL experience  7 - (100 to 300 NHL games) - Mitts, Thompson, Cozens, Dahlin, Jokiharju, VO, and Asplund, 

Rookies - 7 -  UPL, Samuelsson, Fitzgerald, Quinn, Krebs, JJP, & Power

I can see Bryson or Bjork returning, but I hope KA moves on from both.  

[Weave]

27 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Who do you want to prune?  Last year everyone would have said we could probably  prune Thompson and Jokiharju.  Oops. 

 

After last season I would have been OK if we moved on from Thompson, and you know what? I wouldn't care in the slightest if he did for another team what he is doing today as long as we got good value and the team was properly balanced.  Hockey trades where both teams win are the best trades.  No remorse here.

Who would I prune?  Joki would be on my list if he didn't play the right side.  We're flush with young D.  Some need to go.  If they are that strong as prospects we should get value coming back.  Win win.  I've seen all I need to see of Asplund, Bryson, R2, and I know this one will generate flames, but I wouldn't hate seeing Mitts go.  He's 23 and we still don't know what we've got.  If he really has that much promise he'll bring value.  It's a competition for who gets developed and he's got alot of kids breathing down his neck for that spot. 

Kids I'd build around:

Cozens, Dahlin, Krebs, Mule, Thompson, and the kids that haven't had their 9 games yet.   That's like 8 kids on the roster spread among all positions.

I'd move Johnson.  We have too many young D to support developing him properly.

Edited March 1, 2022 by Weave