Do the Sabres need a heavyweight fighter?

[FrenchConnection44]

14 hours ago, inkman said:

I entered the season optimistic that our boys would get by with what they had. Less than half a game into the season, they are clearly not going to get by. 
 

Now is the parade of scumbags who will treat the Sabres like toddlers and have their way with extracurricular stuff. If other teams are going to employ these players, the Sabres should too.  
 

I’d offer whatever Columbus would want for Olivier.  I’m tired of coming away from the every game, win or lose, with our tail between our legs because some psychopath on the opposing team is taking extreme liberties with our players.  
 

It didn’t help the Sabres didn’t capitalize on the 5 on 3 (shocker) and no one even sniffed Olivier the rest of the game. The Sabres were intimidated. When you ice 15+ players that have no business getting in a pillow fight let alone an actual fight, this will happen. Shame on Jarmo for not having the players backs. 
 

Oh well, another season of getting tossed around the ice like children. 

100%

[FrenchConnection44]

12 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You know what ***** it. Please bring of Geersten and give him 12min a night for the ENTIRE SEASON. I just need it at this point because nothing other than the total and abject failure of bringing in a "heavyweight" will make you people understand that toughness is not 1 mofo taking swings so Metsa doesn't have to but a team that just simply DOES NOT PUT UP WITH OTHERS *****. We actually saw that last night, Metsa was the closest and addressed it. Everyone else got into it. That is what toughness is, a team attitude. But nope, bring in a heavy weight, please. For the love of the hockey gods, bring that guy in so I can watch him get caved in on xGF every night and fight 8 times a season. Please, because nothing short of that will make this place understand that the issue at the end of the day was not toughness last night, it was a ***** pp and a terrible goaltending performance. 

Hallelujah, holy *****, where's the tylenol. 

This is just a logical fallacious and poor argument. It’s called false equivalence. Take a logic course.

I just noted above that we could have reasonably landed any of 4 players over the past couple of seasons, who can play well enough to be rostered who foot the bill at relatively reasonable trade or contract pricing that belies the above argument. Jeannot, Kastelic, Olivier, and possibly Foligno who is from Buffalo. Brendan Dillon is another enforcer who signed a 3 yr $12 M deal 3 yrs ago. And will be a free agent this yr. 

What also belies the above argument is that many quality GMs and franchises do put a premium on finding at least a few players who can play well enough to get minutes and be rosters and who are intimidators and enforcers. The Panthers and Bruins give significant focus to that but then so do other teams like Tampa, Columbus, etc. The Panthers made it to the finals 3 straight yrs and won 2 cups with that as part of their philosophy. 
 

 

 

[FrenchConnection44]

12 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

I wonder how many more goals we would have scored if Metsa was bigger and won the fight against Olivier? 

Similarly, I wonder how many more goals UPL would have saved?

First, it’s not just about fighting. It’s about a deterrent to teams starting BS and it’s about being intimidators and agitators rather than being on the receiving end. 

12 hours ago, ... said:

Map out a hypothetical plan to make it happen. Identify your trade targets, identify the assets you are willing to trade. See if you can ballpark a deal that is realistic. Make the conversation pragmatic rather than just a b&tch-fest.

Look at my post above on the players out there that could have been had. These types have been available to be traded for or signed at multiple points over the past few seasons alone. Including Olivier. And the fact that teams see value in this (including multiple consistently winning franchises — Panthers, Bruins, Capitals, et al) tells us it has been, can be, and is being done. To good effect. Heck, Anaheim just traded for AJ Greer and signed him to a deal. 

[PerreaultForever]

Although having an Olivier on the roster would be ideal (can you imagine the havoc Olivier-Carrick-Malentstyn could create?) you can get away with much less. Winnipeg didn't want Stanley back because they got this Bauer kid. Sixth round draft choice. This is the type of player we need to draft in a late round. Find our own willing combatant. He caught Kastelic in the beak tonight but a guy like Kastelic is also adequate. He fought Olivier to a draw last year and has handled Rempe and others. Can also play a little and wins face offs. Carrick is similar but I'm not sure he's all that willing any more. 

I mean if a heavyweight isn't necessary like @LGR4GM thinks why'd the cup winning Canes re-sign DesLauriers? The top teams have heavyweights. It's just the way it is. Actually almost all teams have one. The best options of course are guys who can play a little, PK, and lead. 

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Although having an Olivier on the roster would be ideal (can you imagine the havoc Olivier-Carrick-Malentstyn could create?) you can get away with much less. Winnipeg didn't want Stanley back because they got this Bauer kid. Sixth round draft choice. This is the type of player we need to draft in a late round. Find our own willing combatant. He caught Kastelic in the beak tonight but a guy like Kastelic is also adequate. He fought Olivier to a draw last year and has handled Rempe and others. Can also play a little and wins face offs. Carrick is similar but I'm not sure he's all that willing any more. 

I mean if a heavyweight isn't necessary like @LGR4GM thinks why'd the cup winning Canes re-sign DesLauriers? The top teams have heavyweights. It's just the way it is. Actually almost all teams have one. The best options of course are guys who can play a little, PK, and lead. 

You know what's HILARIOUS about this? Deslaurier is smaller than Malenstyn, a bit bigger than Carrick, and played almost ZER0, 0, None, for the Canes in playoffs. They gave him 3:09 in 1 playoffs game and never used him again. 

Buffalo literally already 2 guys better than DesLauriers. 

[stinky finger]

23 hours ago, inkman said:

After watching Zach Metsa almost commit suicide by enforcer last night, I figured now would be a good time to get the board’s sentiment on this topic. 

Halfway thru that (one-sided) fight this very question popped into my mind. I don't see anyone on this roster that can police and respond in kind. 

I gotta believe this roster will evolve. Obtaining a player capable of protection will be required.

 

[stinky finger]

19 hours ago, msw2112 said:

While it would be great to have a pugilist on the roster who could go toe-to-toe with Olivier and can also play hockey, those guys are few and far between.  What the Sabres needed to do last night was to score 1 - OR TWO - goals during the 5 on 3 that they had as a result of Olivier's goonery and win the game.  Metsa's effort in taking on Olivier was a much better effort than the meek effort on the power play.

Acquiring "that" player may be easier than fixing the PP - sad but true.

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, FrenchConnection44 said:

This is just a logical fallacious and poor argument. It’s called false equivalence. Take a logic course.

I just noted above that we could have reasonably landed any of 4 players over the past couple of seasons, who can play well enough to be rostered who foot the bill at relatively reasonable trade or contract pricing that belies the above argument. Jeannot, Kastelic, Olivier, and possibly Foligno who is from Buffalo. Brendan Dillon is another enforcer who signed a 3 yr $12 M deal 3 yrs ago. And will be a free agent this yr. 

What also belies the above argument is that many quality GMs and franchises do put a premium on finding at least a few players who can play well enough to get minutes and be rosters and who are intimidators and enforcers. The Panthers and Bruins give significant focus to that but then so do other teams like Tampa, Columbus, etc. The Panthers made it to the finals 3 straight yrs and won 2 cups with that as part of their philosophy. 
 

 

 

Take an English course, learn hyperbole.

7 hours ago, FrenchConnection44 said:

 What also belies the above argument is that many quality GMs and franchises do put a premium on finding at least a few players who can play well enough to get minutes and be rosters and who are intimidators and enforcers. The Panthers and Bruins give significant focus to that but then so do other teams like Tampa, Columbus, etc. The Panthers made it to the finals 3 straight yrs and won 2 cups with that as part of their philosophy. 

Who beat the Bruins in the playoffs and laughed them off the ice in May? Remind me. 

[dudacek]

I’ve never seen convincing evidence that a facepuncher deters dirty play in today’s NHL.

Kastelic and Jeannot certainly didn’t stop a “sitting duck” Smurf like Zach Benson from kicking out the skates of Bruin star Charlie McAvoy.

Intimidation is still a viable weapon in the NHL, so toughness matters. But that’s about team toughness and the ability to keep battling and playing winning hockey through the intimidation.

Because guys like Jeannot aren’t particularly good hockey players. If they can’t intimidate you, they are going to lose.

Edited October 3 by dudacek

[SabresFan69420]

I think that when this team is 100% bought in, there is no need for a bruiser/enforcer (see the Tampa game last year)

The problem is that this is a young team that doesn’t buy in every night which means they can get knocked away from their game quickly in those situations. 
 

the benefit of a tough guy is to be the one who is never taking the night off and covers for the times they team isn’t all the way in it or to drag the team back into it if needed. 

[North Buffalo]

Yup shinny season is over Linde needs to move Krebs to fourth line and play it more often... Krebs for all his deficiencies plays hard and tough, Kulich is more skilled imo... Losing Tuch on top line may hurt for a while. 

[Weave]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’ve never seen convincing evidence that a facepuncher deters dirty play in today’s NHL.

Kastelic and Jeannot certainly didn’t stop a “sitting duck” Smurf like Zach Benson from kicking out the skates of Bruin star Charlie McAvoy.

Intimidation is still a viable weapon in the NHL, so toughness matters. But that’s about team toughness and the ability to keep battling and playing winning hockey through the intimidation.

Because guys like Jeannot aren’t particularly good hockey players. If they can’t intimidate you, they are going to lose.

My only counter to that is, player interview after player interview you hear the comments regarding esprit de corp and confidence players get from having a thug that is willing to do thug things.  I can’t dismiss its importance when players consistently extoll its virtues.

Yea, they become rather unuseful in the playoffs these decades, but they seem rather useful in keeping the team inspired on the path to get there.

[dudacek]

4 minutes ago, Weave said:

My only counter to that is, player interview after player interview you hear the comments regarding esprit de corp and confidence players get from having a thug that is willing to do thug things.  I can’t dismiss its importance when players consistently extoll its virtues.

Yea, they become rather unuseful in the playoffs these decades, but they seem rather useful in keeping the team inspired on the path to get there.

I fully agree that the players appreciate having a guy willing to do what most people would rather not.

Personally want a Brad May on my team.

I just don’t buy the deterrent argument.

[Weave]

Just now, dudacek said:

I fully agree that the players appreciate having a guy willing to do what most people would rather not.

Personally want a Brad May on my team.

I just don’t buy the deterrent argument.

I think deterrence is likely overrated, but its not 100% false imo.  I don’t think that erases the effects on esprit de corp and inspiration.

[Archie Lee]

20 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I fully agree that the players appreciate having a guy willing to do what most people would rather not.

Personally want a Brad May on my team.

I just don’t buy the deterrent argument.

I agree. Players who play to the edge or beyond, don't spend any time worrying about getting punched in the back of the helmet by players like Olivier. Yet, as stated, it remains part of the game and I have yet to see a player say he didn't appreciate having such a teammate.

The odd and somewhat concerning thing to me is that we gave up a lot at the deadline to get tougher, when such toughness really isn't needed or utilized in the playoffs, only to then conclude that we didn't need such players for this season. What changed? Were Jarmo and Ruff not on the same page? Why did we give up Rosen, a 2nd, a 3rd, a 4th, and a 6th to get tougher (that is unquestionably what we did), only to conclude 4-5 months later that we didn't need that toughness (I acknowledge that 34 year old Sam Carrick is still here and a useful 4th line player).

I understand that some fans view what we gave up at the deadline as meaningless assets that a team should trade at the deadline to address depth needs, but surely we could have grabbed something more useful in the longer-term. Warren Foegele was acquired for a 2nd. Bobby McMann for a 2nd and a 4th.  

[dudacek]

I don’t think the Sabres need a McMahon or a Foegele near as much as they need or needed the concept of Logan  Stanley.

The reality didn’t match the concept, the trade ultimately failed and Jarmo decided not to double down.

It is entirely possible he may try again for useful player who also happens to be good with the knuckles.

I would. Which doesn’t mean it’s a make or break move, and isn’t the same thing as wasting a roster spot on a facepuncher who can’t play.

Edited October 3 by dudacek

[FrenchConnection44]

6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Take an English course, learn hyperbole.

Who beat the Bruins in the playoffs and laughed them off the ice in May? Remind me. 

Hyperbole only works if it fits the argument. That’s a bs answer when the facts aren’t in your side. 

Sure we beat the Bruins. We also had multiple players in that series who could be heavies. But it’s also one series. One year. We were a superior team. The Bruins were in the playoffs 8 of 9 years playing physical hockey. The Sabres haven’t had a physical hockey team in over a decade and made the playoffs once. Still not an argument. It’s cherry picking. 
 

 

[FrenchConnection44]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

I fully agree that the players appreciate having a guy willing to do what most people would rather not.

Personally want a Brad May on my team.

I just don’t buy the deterrent argument.

I think it does give players a second thought. No one in their right mind is going to take a run at a Reinhart or Verhaghe when you’ve got both Tkachuk brothers, Bennett, Gudas, and even Marchand (who will get dirty) on the bench. 
 

[FrenchConnection44]

8 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You know what's HILARIOUS about this? Deslaurier is smaller than Malenstyn, a bit bigger than Carrick, and played almost ZER0, 0, None, for the Canes in playoffs. They gave him 3:09 in 1 playoffs game and never used him again. 

Buffalo literally already 2 guys better than DesLauriers. 

🙄 You of all people should know that size is not the only variable. We have a 6,6, near 230 lb top 4 defensemen who is as soft as vanilla ice cream in August in Power. 

It’s not always the size of the dog it’s the size of the fight in the dog to borrow the cliche. Tie Domi and Tiger Williams were both under 6 feet but were both badass fighters and physical players - built like boulders who never backed down. 

Neither Malenstyn nor Carrick are really those types. Beck has averaged 31 pim in 3 full seasons. Carrick is the closest we have but I think he’s been tamed a bit from what happened last season. Malenstyn is not that type of player. Even if he can stand up for himself.

There is a reason the Panthers have 4-5 players who can both play solid hockey and bring the rough and tumble in the ice. To the tune of 3 straight finals. A team you repeatedly don’t bring up when responding in these discussions.  (And most other teams try to get a couple of players who can do the same and also play hockey.)

One can even point to the game v Canada the Tkachuk brothers started fights right off the bat in the 4 nations face off to “send a message” as Tkachuk stated. But hey, if you don’t want a Matthew Tkachuk type on your team that’s a choice. 

[dudacek]

29 minutes ago, FrenchConnection44 said:

I think it does give players a second thought. No one in their right mind is going to take a run at a Reinhart or Verhaghe when you’ve got both Tkachuk brothers, Bennett, Gudas, and even Marchand (who will get dirty) on the bench. 
 

 

[FrenchConnection44]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

For one, that’s not exactly taking a run at a player. It’s a tough hip check but not a penalty. Nothing like the BS that happened to Dahlin two years ago and no one stood up for him.

Second, Aho is not known as a dirty player. Third, it’s in the playoffs and the Panthers weren’t going to start something when it was still in doubt and it wasn’t a real run at a guy. 

The next game, however, the Panthers (Tkachuk and Bennett) did get after them when they were up 6-1 and essentially a 3-0 lead. And won the series 4-1. 

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, FrenchConnection44 said:

For one, that’s not exactly taking a run at a player. It’s a tough hip check but not a penalty. Nothing like the BS that happened to Dahlin two years ago and no one stood up for him.

Second, Aho is not known as a dirty player. Third, it’s in the playoffs and the Panthers weren’t going to start something when it was still in doubt and it wasn’t a real run at a guy. 

The next game, however, the Panthers (Tkachuk and Bennett) did get after them when they were up 6-1 and essentially a 3-0 lead. And won the series 4-1. 

It’s a late hit, targeting the knee against the Panthers by a 190-pound player on a team with no tough guys.

Tough guys do not deter cheap shots.

[Slack_in_MA]

30 minutes ago, dudacek said:

It’s a late hit, targeting the knee against the Panthers by a 190-pound player on a team with no tough guys.

Tough guys do not deter cheap shots.

You’re noting an anecdote to make a broad statement of fact. 

You can’t observe the cheap shots that didn’t happen because somebody was afraid of retaliation.

Forget the enforcer. Isn’t a roster that’s “hard to play against” physically something to aspire to (obviously you have to score more than the other team)? Hard checking. Playing with push-back and a physical edge. 

I personally don’t see that the organization values this like it used to. The best old Sabres teams had rugged men who could play the game and hit. And some could throw hands really well. Or at least defend themselves.

 

 

Edited October 3 by Slack_in_MA

[postseasonblues]

They need an effective power play. 

[PerreaultForever]

10 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You know what's HILARIOUS about this? Deslaurier is smaller than Malenstyn, a bit bigger than Carrick, and played almost ZER0, 0, None, for the Canes in playoffs. They gave him 3:09 in 1 playoffs game and never used him again. 

Buffalo literally already 2 guys better than DesLauriers. 

Yes, everybody knows the fighters get benched in the playoffs (with a few minor exceptions for the ones who are decent players) but they are needed to get you through the season. Locker room guys needed to get you there, make other teams take less liberties, and make your players play bolder and bigger. 

"better than" is not the issue.