mjd1001

I'm shopping UPL and taking the best offer. If that is a mid round pick where they have to retain some salary...fine. If its future considerations...fine. If its actually something of value...fine.

This was brough up a few places before...I think he is pushing really hard becaue he is worried about his place/spot on the Olympic roster. If he isn't starting over a journeyman and a guy who just broke into the NHL after playing in the AHL and ECHL, it doesn't look good for him.

Idle base it just then recent play. There is too much 'noise' how are your Thanksgiving when evaluating goalies on a handful of games. They are who they are over the medium so long-term. I'm going to give more leeway to a talented young guy who is still developing. I'm not impressed all that much with UPL. He's done what he was supposed to do, no more. Give me a few games where he is the reason they win....and I'll back him a bit more. Haven't seen that yet.

After how bad he was last year. I need a MUCH larger sample size of good play from UPL before I make the decision he has 'separated' himself from everyone else and is the clear #1. Especially because the numbers Ellis put up are mostly the result of one really bad game.... And the sample chosen just happens to not have a bad game by UPL.... Although he has a lot of them in the past year and is perfectly capable of continuing to have them.

I don't understand going after Krebs for that hit. First of all, I think its dumb that players have to answer for legal hits. 2nd, that wasn't even that big of a hit. I dont' get it.

Peterka's usage is interesting. 7 times this season he has had under 14 minutes of ice time for Utah. That's 3rd, almost 4th line ice time in those games. His overall ice time is the lowest also since his rookie year in Buffalo. He's 5th among their forwards in overall ice time, but they certainly aren't pushing him to get a ton of ice time, thats for sure. Interestingly, he's only 6th among their forwards in PP ice time per game. I don't think they are upset with his play, I just figured he'd be on the first PP unit, and probabably getting closer to 17-18 minutes of ice time per game...which he is doing neither yet.

17 wins, 10 losses....as per NHL.com so far through 2 periods.

So, 3 pretty balanced lines you can just roll out there one after the other.... And then a real traditional 4th line.

I'd be good with Kozak on that 4th line taking the spot of Greenway. Kozak, Krebs, Malenstyn would be a good 4th line to me. I don't care who plays center or Wing. Krebs or Kozak, whatever. I'm surprised they are starting him on that top line. I would think being his first game back with live action, you give him 3rd line minutes +PP time. Once he gets used to the conditioning/speed of the actual game...after a game or two, move him up to the first line with the additional minutes then.

I can see it both ways. I have a stronger feeling about start times on Saturdays though. I love Saturday afternoon games...yet at the same time I wouldn't want to give up Saturday night games. In a perfect world, I'd love the Sabres to play a ton of home games on Saturdays....alternating between 1pm afternoon starts where the building is usually pretty full with kids and families...and then in between have the 7:00 or 7:30 Saturday night game.

A turnover that results in an uncontested shot from the front of the net that becomes a goal is counted the same as a non-turnover but bad positioning that eventually results in an uncontested shot from the front of the net that becomes a goal. If the Xga number is good, but there are a lot of turnovers that result in good scoring chances, that means that there is probably really, really good overall play to make up for those turnovers that result in that good xga number. I want that xga number low. If someone said I could reduce the number of turnovers by the D-men by 5 per week, but in return I have to add from other places 10 shots from the slot due to bad positioning, therefore raising that xga number....I'll take the turnovers with the overall lower xga.

If I'm not mistaken, those great chances from defensive giveaways are factored into the high danger chances allowed.

To me its not unexpected at all. zero is neutral obviously...3 teams at at zero. Of who is left...14 are positive, 15 are negative. That is about as close to even as I would expect.

They have been playing well lately, in the past 2 weeks, there have been multiple games they looked like the best line for the Sabres on the ice. Malenstyn has been interesting for me this season. He's not making a huge impact on the team playing the 4th line and getting less than 10 minutes per game even strenght ice time. I thought he started the season "OK", then had a stretch where he played really, REALLY bad, and now he is actually playing his role very well.

I'll take Ellis with those numbers that are heavily influenced by one Really bad game but a bunch of good games... Rather than somebody else who has similar numbers but it's nothing but a bunch of mediocrity. When evaluating a goaltender, I would much rather look at what percentage of their games are they even or positive on the goals allowed versus expected goals allowed... Rather than raw numbers averaged together.