mjd1001

Kulich to me is not ideal as a top 6 center at THIS time. Next year? I don't think he's ready to be productive enough to be a top 6 center. BUT, I'd rather have him than Cozens. If its Cozens vs Kulich, give me Kulich. If its a different veteran vs those 2, give me the other option (likely). As far as Kozak? Sure, bottom 6 Center. I differ in that I like McLeod in a bottom 6 role. But Kozak, Krebs, McLeod, I'll take 2 of the 3, I don't care which 2.

It seems like a lot of the forum is splintering into 2 groups. Defend UPL, he's totally fine and any problem with him is with those in front of him...... -or- UPL is bad, He is what his current stats say he is and that is a bad goalie, the new contract was an awful decision. I still think it is neither of those, its in the middle. I think he is a good goalie (capable of being a good #1), he is someone that can on any given year has a ceiling to be a top 5-10 guy. But THIS YEAR his play isn't good. Its not all on those in front of him. HIS play is worse than it was last year. HE is allowing more soft goals than last year. He has not been as good as last year, indepedant of the play around him. That doesn't mean he can't be the #1 guy going forward, in my opinion he should be. It just means that this year, HIS play has been below average overall.

I'd take a good vet 2nd pair D-man for Cozens, or a winger even. Krebs is not a top 6 Center, but I think this team is better with him in that role temporarily than with Cozens and how much he hurts you. Would I RATHER have a guy who is the long term solution at Center in exchange for Cozens? Sure, but even if you get this, this current season is lost. I can deal with Krebs there for the rest of the year, in order to maximize the return for Cozens, in case someone is offering a better player at wing or D.

The past few weeks haven't changed my opinion on the matter: -If you can get a GREAT return for ONE of them (and if its Power, sign Byram), then make the deal. If not, keep both. I'm would not be upset either way. -Byram is better now, but by no means is he 'great'. He doesn't have close to the overall game that Dahlin has. Yet, he is still good. -Power is 'just as good' but only 1 out of every 5 games. Overall he's not as good. But, I think he is the type of player that will get a lot better, its just going to take a few years.

Yep. UPL has been worse than last year. The team in front of him is bad, but to me he clearly is not playing as well as last year and letting in more bad goals.

I'd rather have some movement. I've seen for long enough that the roster isn't good enough.

I'm going more and more away from 'its coaching' with the special teams and putting this more on the players: 1.) PK is mostly a function of maintaining discipline. Stay in the 4 point-box formation and let the other team pass the puck around the perimeter. Its a battle of willpower, will the PK get anxious and try to make a move toward the puck and break discipline BEFORE the PP unit forces a pass or shot before it is available? Sure there are great plays made out there, but when I watch PK and PP units around the league, it is just as much about the very simple to teach (by the coaches), hard to play (by the players) art of above. When you watch the Sabres PK goals allowed, I would dare say most of them are when they lose discipline and start chasing. When you watch one of their effective PK's, it is USUALLY when they stay 100% discipline and stay in their positions most of the time, with only an 'occasional' move SLIGHTLY out of their spot to pressure the puck when a sloppy pass is made. We can think back to many PP's the Sabres are on where the other team stays 100% discipline against them, they stay in the perfect rectangle formation and it is so frustrating because when you play that discipline, unless your last name is McDavid or Gretzky and you can do something phenominal with the puck, there usually is nothing to do except kill off your own penalty by passing it around and around. Penalty Killing there is one team that has been in the top 5 overall every year for the last few years, and they also are the best combined over the last few years. Carolina. What do they do? The guys that get minutes are mostly older, taller (cover more territory with their reach when they are stading still) guys. Vets who don't take chances. Watch their PK when the Sabres play them. They probably maintain discipline in their rectangle 80%+ of the time. They don't go chasing pucks into the corner when they have a teammate there already. Their effectiveness is not a Hasek-like goalie (that helps), but it for sure isn't the coach re-inventing the PK. That is the coach demanding guys do what they all KNOW they have to do, and the players being veteran, and discipline enough to do it. Now, the Hurricanes DO pressure the puck more than some teams, they will have ONE guy but ONE guy only go to the puck when its loose (they have a somewhat high-pressue) system, but the key to it, if you watch replays, is that they almost always maintain that rectangle formation. If a Forward goes to the puck on the boards, everyone usually slides over SLIGHTLY but maintain position/discipline. It is the players discipline, their quick thinking, their experience that allows them to do what they do, not coaching x's and o's. That is very simple coaching, it is on the players to execute, and we have some guys that just don't do it. 2.) PP. Yes, there is a little more complex coaching here, but nothing is re-inventing the wheel. There are only so many zone entries to try, so many ways to break a PK discipline, and I'm sure that every coach around the league knows every single one (and if you don't, you can easily see them watching film of other teams.). The only real 'coaching' here is to yell at your guys when they don't do what they are supposed to do, or to maybe advance scout the other team and to see where THEY are not discipline and do your entries/formation to take advantage of that. Again, very easy stuff. There was a night a couple of months ago I was home alone and went to NHL's web site and watched every single PP goal scored (since then I followed up and did that again but on nights with lesser games), and what I observed was this: More than half of PP goals scored were a result of scrums in front of the net where someone whacked away at the puck and it went in (luck), or a bad rebound by a goalie (bad goalie play), or a deflection (luck or the defense failing to clear out someone), or a weak shot that the goalie didin't see that was screened (luck/not clearing out). Basically, the majority of goals scored were not about coaching (good or bad on the PP or the PK) but rather players doing a SIMPLE job that college, junior, or even high school hockey players know to do. There is one team that is always seems to be in the top 5 in PP (over the last few years). Its NOT Edmonton, NOT Toronto....it IS Tampa. Why Tampa? They are a veteran team, a very discipline team in the offensive zone, and they have talented players, not the MOST talented, but above average talented guys who have played with each other SOOO much that there are very few surprises. When you watch their PP, the coaches don't have any magic, there is little to nothing you see them do that other teams don't do. No magical zone entries, no plays/passing formations that are inventive. Its just talented guys that stay VERY discipline, make few mistakes, and know each other very well. So maybe the failure of coaching is not just telling the players what to do, but getting it through their heads when they don't want to follow instructions. But to me I think the PK and PP failures are less the coaches not teaching or not knowing the X's and O's, but rather this falls on the players not being discipline. I mean, many on this forum think this team has hardly any discipline in their 5-on-5 play, why would the PP and PK be any different?

I understand the sentiment, but the on-ice product needs work. If the owner doesn't decide to change the orchestrator, do we just keep the end result product on the ice we have now?

I'm trying to heard? You responding to me clarifying a previous statement. I said Pegula needs to remove himself from decision making and others seem to think I meant he has to remove himself from decisions making on any future GM's. All I did is clarify that statement. You, my friend, are trying to hard to make my comment into something that it isn't.

By decision making, I didn't mean deciding who the GM was...I mean once a GM is in place the roster building and front office building decisions that COULD be left a lot more to the GM.

Their 'point pace' has now dropped into the 60s. In terms of how many games in a row they needs...its up to 13. Win 13 in a row. If they win 13 in a row, they will match the point percentage of the team currently in 8th in the conference....ok, why do I bother.

Yeah, the 'bumbling into a good hire' thing doesn't fly with this franchise. The best hire in the world likely won't work for him. Pegula needs to remove himself from most decision making, I don't see that happening.

Yay

We are just talking about them making the playoffs. 50% of the teams make the playoff each year. Once you MAKE the playoffs, only 6.25% of those teams win the cup. We can't even get to the level of the first 50%

Those who wants Adams gone can only say it so many times. Those who want Cozens traded can only say it so many times. Those who think changes on the defense are needed can only say it so many times. Pegula and management don't get this..or they don't care.......they have lost most of the casual fans with how bad they are playing. They are starting to lose more and more of the hard-core fans. A lot of them will sit thought losing, but they won't stay forever if there is nothing to even think about or talk about. Do SOMETHING at this point. Give the dwindling fan base you have left SOMETHING to talk about.