Weave

You've summed up my concerns regarding the team rather succinctly. I've just lost the emotional edge your post includes.

Partially hiding the quote window when you are editing inside of a quoted post sucks. Oh well. Won't try that again.

I know. The blue plate special starts at 3, innit?

I would call what I saw last night struggling. But I think he should stay in the lineup in the short term, albeit in protected minutes. There is no doubt in my mind that some of what I perceived last night is due to his lack of time in camp, thus the cautious optimism. Still, he struggled.

Said noone. Why the need to go to the extreme to defend something that is a nuanced ?

Our captain did not play at the intensity level we saw out of Hall last night. At least that's how I saw it.

My takes.... Ugly, ugly 1st period by pretty much everyone. They looked like they had a 311 day layoff and 50% of the team never played with their linemates before. I thought Hall looked much more dynamic than Jack. I need Jack AND Hall to be that dynamic. Skinner's talent is too valuable to put with plumbers but he's got to adapt to what the rest of the team is doing too. I don't have an answer, but the guy does make ***** happen. Dahlin's D zone game was not very good. Staal's giveaway in front of the net was troubling. Risto's critics were justified last night. Cozens looked to fit on his line. I don't think he's ready to move into Staal's spot though. But he looked OK. Lost alot of puck battles I thought. Kept right after it though. He certainly wasn't the worst player out there. I really hate that teams can lay out guys like Staal and we just don't have an answer. Not only do we not have a guy to respond, but we also don't have a guy to do in kind. Wouldn't mind a couple of guys on our team that have the capability of being on the other end of those plays. I think we haven't seen one of our guys concussed for the lat time this season. PP1 looks like it'll score its share of goals. My goodness that 1st period goal was a pretty play.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of it either, but I can't say with any confidence that I know what's the better move overall.

Quite a few teams on that list that traded a significant number of 3rd rd picks. At 19% average its a low risk asset to move. And yeah, Buf is definitely below average by a fair degree in the 3rd round.

I guess I wasn't as struck as some of you. He looked to me like he was a step behind in the neutral zone and D zone. He almost appeared slow to me, and he's never looked slow to me any other time I've seen him play. He played better in the O zone but there were a number of times where he was clearly physically overmatched. He lost alot of puck battles. But he also looked like he had a good sense of play. He went to the rights spots and put his nose where it belonged, so that's good. His line was probably the most effective line of the night for Buffalo. He seemed to mesh well with his linemates. And he hustled. He competed. Overall my initial reaction is pretty neutral. I'm cautiously optimistic that we'll see obvious growth this season.

I wanna throw the other perspective out there. Skinner almost certainly doesn't need anyone else to be effective, but his two linemates do need him to be playing within the same system they are playing for the line's effectiveness to be maximized. I'm fairly sure Ralph's point here is that Skinner would be drawing down what Ralph wants Jack and RW1 doing with his freelance act. Same with Staal and Sam. So Ralph puts someone on those lines that will commit to the system to allow those two pairs to maximize their effectiveness within Ralph's system, And Skinner gets moved somewhere that has the least impact on the other two players. So why doesn't Ralph adapt to Skinner? If the team is built for Ralph's system except one guy, why would you change the system when it is just one guy, AND Jeff's certainly capable of adapting himself to that system are both valid responses. I understand and sympathize with both sides to the conversation here. There are plenty of successful coaches who adapted to their stars, Muckler being one, and also plenty of successful coaches who bent the team to the coach's will, Trotts and Laviolette come to mind immediately. Kreuger is of the Barry Trotts mold obviously. Lots of criticism here for Ralph not willing to adapt. Less so for Skinner not willing to adapt. It's interesting for sure. And in a short season there is virtually no time for this to be worked out.

They sure don’t look like a group that has played together long.

I don't have the interest to repeat this task 29 times. Hell, I don't have the interest to collect it once. But if league wide the rate is just under 20%, that's got to suggest that quite a few teams are above that if some are below.

I've not been as critical of Buffalo's drafting record as others. 1 out of 5 in the 3rd round is not good odds at all. 2 players per decade. So when we look at a GM with a 3 yr tenure, I'm not inclined to judge based on 3rd round and later results. But man, it's a bad look for the organization as a whole when you are half that hit rate over a decade.

League wide, 56 players out of 300 played at least 100 games. 19% Buffalo had 1 out of 13 play at least 100 games. Not quite 8%. I’d say the draft criticism starts to be rational here.

The only agenda I’ve ever recognized is the criticism of a team that wasn’t trying in earnest to win.

Tons of judging here. 7 dependents might well be his mother, siblings, their children, his wife and child. If I remember correctly he grew up poor. He may feel obligated to keep them out of where they came from. The gambling, obviously, is a huge problem if you’re in the hole. How many folks with addictions on this site?

And ruined everyone in the process. Amazing feat, really.

Pastajoe and I agree. The end is nigh.

I don’t know about that last part. Was it not apparent to you that Mittlestadt’s play was better than last season? Even his last preseason? Was it not apparent that Cozens looked a bit out of place? Is it not appropriate to alter your pre-preseason thoughts accordingly in at least these cases? No, that game was not the final arbiter for these or any other player, but if the game is meaningless for judgement purposes why is Kreuger scheduling them and why would he impress upon the players to take that game more seriously?

It may not mean much in terms of how the team plays this season. It means something in terms of beating out others for an opening night spot. Limited opportunities to show the team in game situations where you stack up relative to others. Limited opportunities to show under fire that you understand the system and how you fit in it.

I agree with most of this. Tage showed up looking to win a spot on the roster, and did, maybe even a spot on the top line. Mitts showed improvement. He obviously put in the work this offseason. I'm not sure it's enough, but he's improved his positional play a fair amount. Cozens looked overmatched. That surprised me given that he's been playing at a high level for weeks now. Skinner looked like he had something else he wanted to do last night. Roots didn't impress. Neither did Asplund. I don't think Asplund is going to be an NHL'er. Okposo still has gas in the tank. Staal and Reinhart look like they could be lethal. Reider has a nice shot. The defence will be fine.

After one scrimmage and minimal practice time with the team (but he's been playing at a higher intensity level than everyone else for weeks now) it sure looked like Mitts was more ready than Cozens. I wasn't impressed at all with Mitts work on the O zone. I was impressed with the improvement in his overall positional play. How's your confidence level if it goes Skinner - Mitts- Sheahan, bucause I think that's more likely at this moment.

I seem to recall that the last complaint to be heard resulted in the judge threatening sanction.

Skinner looked disinterested at times.