Let's Assume: Lineups for Opening Night

[Mr Peabody]

Who’s going to protect the young ‘uns?  Surely the Panthers won’t be taking liberties.  Better get the PP fixed or you’re playing with fire.  

[dudacek]

25 minutes ago, Weave said:

This gives me PTSD.  I almost literally recoil at this line of logic.  It brings me right back to Darcy Regier glowing about Tim Connolly coming back from injury (and was it Drew Stafford being promoted?) being equivalent to bringing in outside help.  I thought it was dishonest logic then.  I think it is dishonest logic now.

The logic wasn't dishonest, the context was.

As I just posted elsewhere:

Briere, Drury, Afinogenov, Connolly, Dumont, Kotalik, Grier, Numminen, Campbell, Tallinder, Lydman, Kalinin and McKee walked for a grand total of Steve Bernier, Tyler Ennis and Dominic Moore in return.

Stafford did ostensibly replace Kotalik or Dumont. Didn't matter under the circumstances.

No team survives that.

[Weave]

26 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The logic wasn't dishonest, the context was.

As I just posted elsewhere:

Briere, Drury, Afinogenov, Connolly, Dumont, Kotalik, Grier, Numminen, Campbell, Tallinder, Lydman, Kalinin and McKee walked for a grand total of Steve Bernier, Tyler Ennis and Dominic Moore in return.

Stafford did ostensibly replace Kotalik or Dumont. Didn't matter under the circumstances.

No team survives that.

We’re gonna fundamentally disagree here.  Claiming Kulich and others added last season as new additions to “replace” the guys that are gone is playing fancy. 
 

Yes, that 07-08 team had more to overcome than just losing Tuch and Byram,.  It doesn’t change the dishonesty of calling guys who were already here reinforcements for the players we lost, then or now.

[JohnC]

54 minutes ago, Weave said:

We’re gonna fundamentally disagree here.  Claiming Kulich and others added last season as new additions to “replace” the guys that are gone is playing fancy. 
 

Yes, that 07-08 team had more to overcome than just losing Tuch and Byram,.  It doesn’t change the dishonesty of calling guys who were already here reinforcements for the players we lost, then or now.

You are right regarding how to classify players as new additions or not. On the other hand, Kulich was not a factor last year due to a serious health issue and Norris didn't contribute much due to injuries. Assuming that we can get production from these two players who were not meaningful contributors last year, then it's not unreasonable to believe that they are improving the roster. In my view, if Norris can play at a 2C level, then that is a bonus addition that didn't exist last season.  

[nfreeman]

I’m willing to believe that Kulich, Östlund and Helenius can make up for the loss of Tuch, and perhaps even make major contributions to an improved offense, and that between Zelly, Crevvy and a healthy Timmins, the loss of Byram won’t hurt too badly.

What really matters is whether the players are mentally tough enough to believe it and shrug off the losses.  They weren’t in 2007.

We’ll see.  No outcome is assured.  

[...]

11 hours ago, Hoss said:

It's undeniable there's a chance that this team takes a large step back.

Isn't that the same as the weatherman saying "well, it could rain tomorrow, and the rain has a chance of being heavy, but perhaps it won't be heavy at all, maybe more of a light rain. Or, if this front loses energy as it crosses the Berkshires, it may not rain at all, in fact, in that case it could be mostly sunny, and, thanks to the front, much lower humidity and highs in the upper 70s. Certainly, it's undeniable there's a chance for heavy rain, but, it's equally undeniable there's a chance it could be super nice out. Back to you, Mary."

[Hoss]

2 minutes ago, ... said:

Isn't that the same as the weatherman saying "well, it could rain tomorrow, and the rain has a chance of being heavy, but perhaps it won't be heavy at all, maybe more of a light rain. Or, if this front loses energy as it crosses the Berkshires, it may not rain at all, in fact, in that case it could be mostly sunny, and, thanks to the front, much lower humidity and highs in the upper 70s. Certainly, it's undeniable there's a chance for heavy rain, but, it's equally undeniable there's a chance it could be super nice out. Back to you, Mary."

Yes. That was the point.

[...]

The Sabres could have scored 128 fewer goals last season and still keep the 109 points. Losing Tuch's 33 goals and whatever Byram had isn't really something to be worried about.

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

We’re gonna fundamentally disagree here.  Claiming Kulich and others added last season as new additions to “replace” the guys that are gone is playing fancy. 
 

Yes, that 07-08 team had more to overcome than just losing Tuch and Byram,.  It doesn’t change the dishonesty of calling guys who were already here reinforcements for the players we lost, then or now.

This is about as honest as saying you can’t count Barkov among the reasons Florida might improve this year because he was already there.

[Weave]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

This is about as honest as saying you can’t count Barkov among the reasons Florida might improve this year because he was already there.

Now do it where Florida loses a Tkachuck and Barkov is positioned as his replacement.  Its dishonest.

Edited July 24 by Weave

[That Aud Smell]

8 hours ago, nfreeman said:

We’ll see.  

I came here to post this.

Edited July 24 by That Aud Smell

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, nfreeman said:

I’m willing to believe that Kulich, Östlund and Helenius can make up for the loss of Tuch, and perhaps even make major contributions to an improved offense, and that between Zelly, Crevvy and a healthy Timmins, the loss of Byram won’t hurt too badly.

What really matters is whether the players are mentally tough enough to believe it and shrug off the losses.  They weren’t in 2007.

We’ll see.  No outcome is assured.  

No doubt that Tuch's departure is a loss. But if you add Quinn to your list of potential increased production from players on the roster, then the loss of Tuch may be compensated for. I also expect Benson to increase his goal scoring from last year. 

With respect to the Byram departure, I expect Power to become more aggressive offensively within his pairing. 

[Hoss]

8 hours ago, ... said:

The Sabres could have scored 128 fewer goals last season and still keep the 109 points. Losing Tuch's 33 goals and whatever Byram had isn't really something to be worried about.

That's just not even close to how reality works, but I'm still curious about the logic you used to reach the number 128

Edited July 24 by Hoss

[...]

29 minutes ago, Hoss said:

That's just not even close to how reality works, but I'm still curious about the logic you used to reach the number 128

How does "reality" work, then? 

[LGR4GM]

13 hours ago, Mr Peabody said:

Who’s going to protect the young ‘uns?  Surely the Panthers won’t be taking liberties.  Better get the PP fixed or you’re playing with fire.  

In the NHL you have to learn to protect yourself. 

 

[Hoss]

12 minutes ago, ... said:

How does "reality" work, then? 

Again, I don't know the logic you used to reach the number 128, but if it's as simple as "they had this many goals they didn't need, so removing guys who produced less than that would mean they get the same result," then could you take MacKinnon off Colorado? Sebastian Aho off Carolina?

[DarthEbriate]

Win 50 games by score of 2-1
Lose 9 games in OT/SO by score of 2-3.
Lose 23 games by a combined score of...  10-163.
I'd hate to be the goalie who dresses behind the team on those nights.

Edited July 24 by DarthEbriate

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

Now do it where Florida loses a Tkachuck and Barkov is positioned as his replacement.  Its dishonest.

If Barkov was asked to do what Matthew was doing, he quite literally could be in terms of this year’s roster versus last year’s.

It’s a factual observation not a commentary on “GM spin”.

[...]

15 minutes ago, Hoss said:

Again, I don't know the logic you used to reach the number 128, but if it's as simple as "they had this many goals they didn't need, so removing guys who produced less than that would mean they get the same result," then could you take MacKinnon off Colorado? Sebastian Aho off Carolina?

It is the difference between the number of goals scored and the number of goals needed to win.

Of course it isn't quite as simple as removing any player A off of any team B. But, we're talking about the Sabres and Tuch. Your retort presumes we're talking about making up for a 127 or 80 point player. We're not. We're talking about making up for a 66 point player.

The loss of Tuch is routinely framed as "how are they going to replace Tuch's 33 goals?". Well, they don't need to replace Tuch's 33 goals, they probably only need to replace about 5 of those goals. Are you going to argue every one of Tuch's goals turned the tide of the game? 

 

[Hoss]

34 minutes ago, ... said:

It is the difference between the number of goals scored and the number of goals needed to win.

Of course it isn't quite as simple as removing any player A off of any team B. But, we're talking about the Sabres and Tuch. Your retort presumes we're talking about making up for a 127 or 80 point player. We're not. We're talking about making up for a 66 point player.

The loss of Tuch is routinely framed as "how are they going to replace Tuch's 33 goals?". Well, they don't need to replace Tuch's 33 goals, they probably only need to replace about 5 of those goals. Are you going to argue every one of Tuch's goals turned the tide of the game? 

 

My response does not make that presumption; it was just a simple way to reject your premise.

I'm not of the mind that they need to simply replace Tuch's 33 goals, and if that premise is so misguided, then a premise that directly relies on it being the case is also misguided. They need to replace his entire body of work. In all three zones. In the locker room. In front of the cameras. Etc. etc.

Not an impossible task. And while I'm not sure if it will happen this season, I'm confident they have the younger pieces to make it happen in short order.

[#freejame]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

In the NHL you have to learn to protect yourself. 

 

Important to note how much more physical and engaged in scrums Noah Östlund was in this game than Tuch. My son watches the highlights of this game several times a week and it always stands out. 

[inkman]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

In the NHL you have to learn to protect yourself. 

 

I was proud of our boys that day. Let's not act like the Sabres didn't eat more than they gave that day. It was fun, it took courage. They didn't lose any relevant toughness from last season and may have gained a little with Crevier. Hopefully that's enough, if not Jarmo seems more than willing to bring in those types of players during the season. 

[Mr Peabody]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

In the NHL you have to learn to protect yourself. 

 

PP came through that game.  My concern is injuries like Cozens, Carrick got.  Greenway could at least neutralize a fighter by clutching.   There’s no deterrent on our team.   A couple years back Lindy put Geertson  in against Sens just to keep Tkachuk off Dahlin. 

[LGR4GM]

23 minutes ago, Mr Peabody said:

PP came through that game.  My concern is injuries like Cozens, Carrick got.  Greenway could at least neutralize a fighter by clutching.   There’s no deterrent on our team.   A couple years back Lindy put Geertson  in against Sens just to keep Tkachuk off Dahlin. 

Because it is 2026 and this idea is so ***** dead that every time it comes up I want to vomit. Deterrent, LOL. 

Also Geersten was an awful NHL player and I DO NOT BELIEVE FOR A ***** SECOND, that Tkachuk gave a flying ***** about Geersten. 

[dudacek]

I think I need @mjd1001 or @LGR4GM to refresh me on the effectiveness of Tage/Benson.

To me, those are the two best forwards - one a retriever and puck mover, the other a finisher and a puck carrier - and the backbone of what should be the top line.

Quinn/McLeod and Norris/Doan work well together and look like a good base for 2A and 2B and Carrick/Malenstyn is the obvious 4th line duo.

Mix and match Krebs, Zucker and the three kids as injury, opponent and play dictate.

To me, that’s the most logical base up front.