dudacek

I don’t agree with the bold: I would trade any of the prospects for the right return and I disagree that Östlund is a significantly less valuable piece than the three you want off the table. He gets underrated around here and he might be the only centre in the bunch. Rosen, sure. I perceive him as a 2nd line wing ceiling; I think the other prospects are significantly better, we have a lot of other options to fill that role already, and they aren’t that hard to come by.

I think this really premature. Tage, Mitts, Cozens, Krebs Savoie, Östlund, Kulich can all likely play centre in your top 9. Tage, Mitts, Cozens, Quinn, Peterka, Savoie, Kulich, Benson can all likely play wing in your top 9. That's 10 players for 9 spots. Mitts is the only one you have to make a decision on significant money any time soon. Tuch is a UFA in a few years, Skinner shortly after. While i do see the merits of selling high on the prospects you perceive as least likely to make it, I don't think we've seen enough to be anointing some and trading others. We didn't know how good Thompson or Jokiharju was at 21, and I'm pretty sure we can say the same about Krebs and Savoie and really anyone younger than Tage. I also see the merits of trading some expensive veterans when there are kids ready to step into their roles as a smart play under the cap, as people have already advocated for Mittelstadt. And this includes Cozens and Thompson, depending on how players throughout the organization develop. As far as Östlund goes, there is definitely as much of an opportunity for him to grow into a middle six centre as there is Mittelstadt, Kulich, Krebs and Savoie. if he develops as predicted, he will be a middle 6 SHL centre this year, a middle 6 AHL next year and a bottom 6 NHL centre the year after. that's three years before you start to even think about "making room" for him. Instead of zooming in to Östlund as the tradable asset, and one we should move now, I'm having my analytics and hockey people running cost/benefit analyses on all of them and being open to move any when the timing and opportunity line up.

Character limits: Twitter on many levels

Athletic did a good piece on this: https://theathletic.com/4747247/2023/08/09/nhl-commit-team-decision-player-contract/ Star players know they'll get paid buckets, so things they tend to care about more: Lifestyle and privacy: Is this going to be a good place for their family to live in the foreseeable future? Legacy and the chance of winning a Stanley Cup: What is their fit and their role? Ownership., culture and franchise health Proximity to family Those things all apply to everyone, but salary plays more of a role for the middle class.

Definitely not an issue for nhl players, or a lot of rich, healthy people. i was thinking about the regular folk posting on the thread.

Now, I'm actually curious. My perception of Alberta is that it's a wealthy province with relatively low taxes Alberta has personal income tax rate of 10% on the first $134,000, and no provincial sales tax. Health care is paid for. Calgary has an average household income of $140,919 and a median of $99,715. Taxes turn that into $111,867and $84,770, according to federal government figures. (multiply by .74 to get US dollars.) How does that compare to what you expect south of the border? *** I'm also curious how much reality matches perception. Calgary itself is a nice, clean, modern young city, that seemed to function well in my visits; it's not far out of the Canadian Rockies, which are beautiful. it's not small; there's $1.4 million people, lots of recreation. it's also the air hub for Western Canada — travel is relatively easy. Winters can get real cold, but usually only in patches, summers are nice and the weather varies a lot. it has four seasons and plenty of sunshine. Culturally, it's the most midwest/republican of the Canadian provinces, so middle of the pack for the US.

it wouldn't even enter into my thought process.

Toronto - hate the city, hate the fans, hate the spotlight Islanders - living in Metro New York would be my nightmare Rangers - living in Metro New York would be my nightmare Devils - living in Metro New York would be my nightmare Dallas - don’t think Texas would be a good fit for this Wet Coaster Top 5 cities not on my NTC: Vancouver Seattle San Jose Buffalo Montreal - these are all about where I think I’d like to live, keeping in mind I’ve never been to the latter 2, or about 2/3rds of the league’s cities.

4 points in 17 games last year as a 17-year-old and apparently showed quite well in the playoffs.. 27 in 32 at the junior level. For comparison, also in their draft years: Östlund 0 in 11, 42 in 32 Rosen 1 in 22, 12 in 12 Dahlin 20 in 41, 2 in 1 Asplund 12 in 46, 0 in 0 Asplund was an early bloomer. Really thought he was going to be a strong 3C, but he just couldn’t make the step.

NHL teams averaged 3.18 goals against per game and a .904 SV% last year. I'd say his peak would be the 11 games he put up more than .920, and his nadir the 10 games under .880. My takeaway on UPL's season was not "low peak" but rather unacceptably frequent low lows. As far as the bold goes, that might be a dated view; Only 27 of the 79 goalies who played at least 10 games were over .908. Just 9 of them were backups.

Sure, tell Lou Lamiorello that

The issue and lasting memory with UPL was the number of dumpster fire starts down the stretch: 18 saves on 25 shots in a 7-0 loss to Boston 6 saves in 10 shots in a 6-3 loss to the Leafs 33 saves in 40 shots in a 7-2 loss to Calgary 3 goals against in the first 12 minutes in a 5-1 loss to Carolina He was 3-6-2 with GAA over 4.00 and a SV% under .870 in February and March. He had just 3 quality starts in that stretch and lost 2 of them (the 2-1 back breaker to the Isles and a 3-2 SHootout loss to the Rangers a few days later. It kinda makes you forget his big games In January December that saved the season’ 37 saves in 40 shots to beat Boston in Boston, back-to-back .950s on the road in Colorado and Vegas And 39 and 38 save wins over Minnesota and Nashville He was 12-4-1 with a respectable 3.09 GAA and .908 SV%

I've never been worried about Savoie's size long-term: he's got a Danny Briere build: that squat, low centre of gravity combined with his burst is a great hockey player's build when combined with his competitiveness. My context was more about filling out the roster this year: the weight numbers right now aren't seemingly giving any of them an advantage.

I think the only way this doesn't happen is if he is dramatically outplayed by one of the big 3 forward prospects (Kulich Savoie, Benson). Still, this was pretty interesting (from elite prospects): Matt Savoie 179 lbs Jiri Kulich 179 lbs Isak Rosen 174 lbs Lukas Rousek 172 lbs Zach Benson 170 lbs I mean, it's hard to trust weights on the internet, but that raised my eyebrows. I thought Benson and Rosen were the pipsqueaks, with Savoie only slightly bigger and Kulich and Rousek far more physically ready. Maybe not..

The Sabres have 4 goalies with NHL experience 😜

Nobody can finish

Pretty straightforward concept. We all know things won't be the same as last year. Give us 5 differences that are reasons why you think the Sabres will be good this year, and 5 that are reasons why they won't be: I'll start. The Sabres will be good because: 1) Casey Mittelstadt will have a career year and will cement himself as a core piece 2) A healthy Rasmus Dahlin and a more mature Owen Power will tilt the ice for 45 minutes a night in their team's favour the way no other NHL blueline duo will or can. 3) Jordan Greenway won't be a stud, but he will be exactly the reliable, 2-way middle-six big body the team was missing last year. 4) Peyton Krebs will emerge as one of the league's better 3Cs. 5) Devon Levi is the real deal and will make all this goalie angst about as moot as the backup position on Tampa. The Sabres won't be good because: 1) There is no way the forward corps will be as healthy as it was last year and the team relies far too much on their top line to survive an extended injury to any of them. 2) Eric Johnson is not an NHL regular any more and Conor Clifton will elevate to his increased responsibilities about as well as Colin Miller did when we got him from Vegas. 3) Dylan Cozens won't take the step most expect him to. 4) Jack Quinn's absence removes the most obvious candidate for internal growth up front and no one will be acquired or step up to fill that hole. 5) The coaching staff will fail in an effort to make the team more accountable defensively

i agree with the bold. I also think the rigid grid of a pre-game lineup doesn't really reflect the reality of an NHL game or an NHL season to the extent we think it does. I explained my rationale in post elsewhere on the site a few days ago: I think we going to see Dahlin and Samuelsson split up more than most expect. I get the sense Clifton and Johnson will result in a more even ES rotation and more R/L emphasis. it least that's my reading of what Donnie said post-FA Something like this maybe, as a base in an average game? Dahlin Johnson 10 minutes ES Power Clifton 12 ES Mule Jokiharju 12 ES Power Dahlin 4 Looking for extra offence ES Samuelsson Dahlin 4 Looking for extra defence ES PP: Dahlin 5, Power 3 SH: Mule/Clifton 3 Johnson 2 Other guys 1-2 With the rest being the random pairings that injuries and game situations spit out. That layout turns the minefield that was the 3rd pairing last year into something that can survive hard opponents when they have to, and should do well against their preferred matchups. The 2nd pairing is improved as well, and Dahlin is so strong he and Johnson should be fine if they aren't ridden hard like a top shutdown pair. Could be a way to some reasonable improvement in our goals against if the forwards and goalies co-operate. So that base in practice looks something like this on average per game: Dahlin 25 Power 23 Mule 21 Clifton 19 Jokiharju 18 Johnson 14

Skinner Thompson Tuch Peterka Cozens Mittelstadt Greenway Krebs Olofsson Girgensons Jost Okposo Rousek Dahlin Johnson Power Clifton Samuelsson Jokiharju Stillman Lyubushkin Levi Luukkonnen

Don't disagree with a lot of this, but if you told me I could have Montembeault, Husso, Korpisalo, Samsonov, Bobrovsky, or Levi, I'd take Levi. I'd also feel comfortable matching him up against Merzlikins, Jarry, Hart, Kuemper and Vanecek. Call me crazy 🤷‍♂️. And none of what you just wrote really addresses the point of my post: as the 4 teams I cited proved, good teams can and do make the playoffs with goaltending like what the Sabres got last year. I don't know if the Sabres are good enough to follow in their footsteps, but through my Kool-aid glass in August, I'm not seeing any reason why their skaters can't match the skaters on those other teams. Even if what Adams has done is not what I'd do. Let's get this season started already.

@JohnC has beaten this to death, but if the Sabres 18 skaters are good enough, the team will make the playoffs without any improvement in net. People point to Vegas and others reply, yeah, but that's Vegas. But: The Edmonton Oilers made the playoffs last year with a raw rookie Stuart Skinner playing 48 games and the absolutely abysmal Jack Campbell (.888 SV%) playing 36. The Los Angeles Kings made the playoffs with career minor leaguer Pheonix Copley playing 37 games and the corpses of Jonathan Quick (.876 SV%) and Cal Petersen (.868 SV%!) combining for 41 games. The Florida Panthers went to the finals with the duo of Bobrovsky and Knight (each a .901 SV%) combining for 71 games. And the Seattle Kraken made the playoffs with the UPL-level duo of Grubauer (39 games, .895 SV%) and martin Jones (48, .887) it's no reason to accept the status quo, but apparently teams have goaltending like ours and make the playoffs all the time.

For each other? Other than the fact they are smallish forwards, they aren't at all alike as players.

Here's one for you, from Down Goes Brown in the Athletic: It’s August, barely anything is happening, and the casual fans are all focused on baseball, barbecues, “Barbie”, and the occasional NFL preseason games. In the hockey world, only the diehards are still around. If you’re reading this, then that’s you. Good. We need to talk. I wouldn’t write this piece during the season because the casual fans would take it personally. They’d probably get upset. But you? You’re still reading hockey content in mid-August, even when you know there’s nothing to read about. You can handle some big kid talk. And that’s what you’re getting today. We need to talk about you. Specifically, about your fan base. There are some truths that you and your fellow fans need to hear. No, I don’t know which team you cheer for. That’s the beauty of it — I don’t need to. Because today we’re going to talk about some things that apply to pretty much every fan base. Even yours? Yes. Especially yours. You may not like them, but it’s better that you hear them from a friend. Here is a hard truth your fan base needs to hear. You’re overrating your prospects and young players They’re not that good. OK, yes, some of them are. Depending on where your team has spent the last few years on the whole contending-to-tanking continuum, they may even be very good. They’re just not as good as you think they are. That’s because you’re probably falling into the same trap that virtually all fans do: You’re looking into a future where all your team’s prospects have reached their ceiling. If every one of those guys is as good as the experts say they could be, we’re in great shape! But you’re not because that’s not how prospects work. A few of them will reach their ceiling. If you’re very lucky, one or two might even go Tage Mode and smash through that ceiling. But other guys will stall out before they reach their full potential, and some will just end up as busts who never make it. That’s true even if your team is especially good at developing. It’s just the nature of how sports work. And you know this, of course — when it comes to other teams. But when it’s your guys, and you’ve paid close attention to everything said about them, it’s easy to get caught up in the hype and confuse a ceiling with a most-likely outcome. And once you’ve fallen into that trap, you get very mad when somebody comes along and suggests that the future isn’t exceedingly bright. Look at this prospect list, you want to yell, it’s filled with future stars. Except it isn’t.

So what you're saying is UPL does a fantastic job of pumping up our offence and probably should get more starts? 😜

Then "the Sabres" is pretty irrelevant, no? The guys Adams has hired have been poached (Weber, Peca), interviewed for GM positions (Karmanos, Ventura) and/or so far, so good (Granato, Appert, the scouts and development coaches) In the high-turnover world of professional sports that's hardly a questionable record.