mjd1001

The Blues have not much on their roster that is scary. Sure, they have a better record than the Sabres, but this is the team that only beats you if you make mistakes, if you control the game vs them you win. No ultra high end talent, zero guys even bordering on elite. The reason they win any games at all is they have an somewhat above average, veteran D-unit that rarely makes mistakes and is backed up by forwards who are always fresh because they roll lines, and have decent (slightly above average) goaltending. This might be the definition of a team that does not beat you, you only 'lose' to them when you don't play your game and you make mistakes.

Girgensons is a 4th liner, when you are talking your 10th-12th best forward, you normally don't always need a ton of offensive talent, but to say he has none is just wrong. 5 on 5 goals per 60 he is 6th on the team this year, and if you go back over recent history (I searched and combined the past 3 years with anyone who played half the games or more for the Sabres) he is still 6th over that timeframe. Not bad for a 4th liner. His shooting percentage is just shy of 9%. Again, not great, but about the same this year (or better) than Cozens, Greenway, VO and Benson...and not too far below what Peterka's is for both years of his career. Anyone who is my 4th line (10th-12th forward on the team) that is better than 10th in goals per 60 (best way to measure offensive production for players with limited ice time and little-to-no PP time), I think thats actually good for the 4th line.

The Sabres EHL affiliate now in Jacksonville, FL has huge turnouts to games. Anyone on the board ever been there? I'd like to know what the gameday experience is and the quality of the arena is down there for such huge turnouts.

Ok, Biro...anyone know this guy REALLY well? Like if he were to stick around the NHL, what is his ceiling? Is he a defensive specialist? Physical at all? super hard forechecker? Energy guy? I have watched him play, but maybe someone who watches him in Rochester a bit, what is his style of play and in 2-3 years from now if he WAS in the NHL, what would his potential role be?

I try to not go at people too hard, but with some people, I have gone back and forth really hard on some topics. It can get heated. What I try to do is look at everyones screename and recognize those people who interact with me....but not to remember the conversations too hard. I'm sure I have gone back and forth with you over the last few years on some pretty heated things, but after a day or two goes by I end up liking a post or yours or you (and others) do the same to me. I think its ok to argue on here...as long as it doesn't get TOO personal..and as long as we don't hold that grudge for too long.

This team has a lot of potential depth, much of which will be very good in not too long from now. The issue is, if you have a FULL roster, that young depth you would ideally want to work into games gently. When you have young guys it helps if they are talented, but maybe the first few games you don't want to have to give them ice time in the 3rd period where if they mess up it can cost the team a win. We all have our opinions and we all think we know more than we do, and Benson, so far is an example. I wasn't upset that the Sabres drafted him...but something about him I wasn't feeling all that good about. Just didn't think it was a great pick and thought if he turned out he would be a 'decent' nhl player at best but it would take him 3-4 years to get to that point. Yep, I look to be pretty wrong on that one.

Maybe St. Catharines? Although you don't want to have to potential deal with a border crossing. Are AHL facilities really that good across the league? I ask because I really don't know. I was at an Amerks game, and I didn't think it was all that bad, certainly not a dump. Maybe things have changed across the NHL? If you are not going to keep them in Rochester and you did build a new facility, how about Niagara Falls? Right across the border, a 20-30 minute drive from downtown but enough of a separation to give it a different 'feel'. And it doesn't have to be in run-down-main st niagara falls, you could do something off the highway, maybe lewiston.

We all know goalies are strange guys how they develop. UPL could turn back into an inconsistent guy and be a borderline AHL/NHL guy with no further development. He also could turn into one of the best in the NHL over the next couple years. Or he could get slightly better and be a decent-but-not-great #1 but a solid #2 (Marty Biron comes to mind). You never know with goalies.

Each time Comrie takes the net, there seems to be about a 1 in 3 chance he will get injured again, bringing Levi back up.

100% agree. Fans do it also big time. It seems that 9 times out of ten when the Sabres or Bills win a big game, its because of how good they are, how well they played. When they lose a game, its 'the coach needs to go' or now what changes have to be made. Rarely, if ever, is the outcome of a game simply you were that good or that bad. It is equally how the other team was, how 'good' or 'bad' they are.

I don't get that...the "looks bad for KA" stuff here and all over Twitter. So the Sabres are making a move that is likely good for the current team by passing on him, but some people are just looking for anything to support their narrative that will they take something that is just (Likely) wrong so they can say what they want to say.

Vets at the correct age (fowards under 30 but with a lot of experiene and D-men between the age of 26-32). That is perhaps a big thing that is overlooked in terms of how successful a team is. Yes, you need talent. But a lot of people can't figure out why Seattle was pretty good from the start, so was Vegas. Why are the Kings doing so well now (and there are other examples). A lot of it has to do with teams, espically on the back end, that have 'decent enough' pure talent but have a lot of expereince.

When Ulmark was 25, I beleive he had only spent very small stints with the Sabres at that point, playing 26 games over 3 seasons with a losing record (although a losing record on a pretty bad team). Goalies can, and mostly DO take time.

Boston has now lost 3 in a row, allowing 17 goals in those 3 games. Lost 4 of their last 5, allowing 5 or more goals in all 5 of those losses. They have allowed 23 goals in their last 5 games, after only allowing 32 total in the previous 16 games. A small bump in the road? or a bigger issue starting to show up with the Bruins?

I'm not in the fire him camp yet. As other have said, who are you replacing him with and give me a reason why they would be a lot better first.

It appears he has taken that step where now he's perceived as a legit NHL goalie. Now let's see him take that next step... And keep up this relative level of play for a few weeks or a month or two. Then we can actually start talking about him being a legit good NHL goalie.

He has to make the decision... If he was going to be just a 'depth piece' here, all the reason why he may not want to be here. I think wherever he goes he's going to want to get meaningful minutes. As armchair GM's, a lot of us may have wanted him as a depth piece, but he's the one making that decision, not us.

I was referring to last year also. He's not a rookie so because he only has four games,I also was going back to a couple good games he had at the end of last year... And honestly he had an occasional really good game at the beginning of the year before he got hurt.

Agree. Does he have a lot to prove? Of course he does. But after a decent rookie season last year, I wouldn't really entertain the thoughts that they might have blown the draft pick at this moment. Blowing a draft pick doesn't mean who has more points or who is better right now.... If you're judging whether or not the draft pick was wasted, you have to take into account his injury and the missed time.

I'm not down on Levi, but at this moment in time there's no real reason to have him up here playing an occasional game when he can be in Rochester playing more games. UPL is playing well right now, and Comrie has proven that he can have good games also. I'd rather have Levi in Rochester and free up that roster spot to occasionally give one of the many young guys that play forward in Rochester a few game taste of the NHL here and there when needed.

A lot of times the Defense plays a bit tighter and more aggressive for those 3 quarters and it works (often). The logic is...when protecting a lead play softer, make the other team work down the field and as they take time off the clock hope they make a mistake. If by the time they get on your side of the field they don't make that mistake, then tighten up. That is coaching by fear. The thing is if you rush harder and play a little tighter in those last couple minutes, there WILL be times you will be burnt deep. However, we see that when they play loose, they are losing just as many (if not more games). Again, it is coaching out of fear/for reputation. If you get burnt deep while playing aggressive, the coaches are fearful that they will be called out for it. If you lose the way they play late game D, you can just say "the other team made plays"

Lots of mistakes, I don't want to ignore everything everyone has said but: You lost, in overtime, on the road, against the team with the best record in the league and it was very close. You out gained them, and for much of the game were dominating the game. I hate, I despise when people complain about referees. But...In a game that close. That's something that you had to fight against. Of all the things that happened, a guy had to make a 59 yard field goal on a wet turf in the rain in order for you to not win the game right there. That FG, the was-it-a-fumble-or-not...in most cases would go for the Bills and it would be game over with a Win. But they didn't. In a typical game, you might call 15 bad plays and you might make 20 mistakes. If you win that game, you don't even notice those things or we gloss over them as fans. It's just when you lose it that we notice those things. It sucks the Bills lost, and this close game might be the difference between them making the playoffs and not. But It's not the reason to make wholesale changes. The reason you make major changes, it's if you think you can be better. If you go 13 - 4 and make the playoffs but you think a coaching change will make you better you do it. The single biggest thing I've taken away from the past few weeks of watching the bills.... Poyer and Hyde both are the Buffalo Bills version of Okposo. They don't need to just go next year... They shouldn't be here this year and the team would probably be better if they were replaced with younger/faster players. As good of leaders they are and as smart as they are, physically they just can't keep up with the play. Just one other observation. Dalton Kincaid. It just seems like his role on the team is... Throw the ball to him on second and long and he will never get the first down, but he will always get you within one or two yards of it.

I agree almost 100% but I'll take it by saying that the D actually isn't that bad Many games. I posted this earlier in this thread, the forwards really hang the D out to dry. After you see a few goals where a defenseman is out of position, Go to nhl.com and look at the replay of the goal. Oftentimes they will show it from various angles.... go back 10 to 15 seconds. Watch the play develop. Go frame by frame. You know what I see when I do that a lot? Forwards are late getting back, Often times without much effort. Forwards are losing battles on the wall in their own end. Forwards chase the puck like a dog chases a squirrel and leave their position open, so now a defenseman has to worry about HIS guy AND whether or not he should step up and take the guy who is wide open because Cozens or Krebs or another young guy made an awful D-zone decision (and yes, Cozens does this a LOT...stop the talk about him being a good 2-way playe. He can be a disaster positionally in his own end... Don't confuse him skating hard with him knowing a single thing about defensive positioning) Oftentimes the D man gets caught between those two spots when the goal is scored and on the 5 second replay it looks like the defense didn't know what they were doing, when in actuality they were trying to cover for the awful forward play. A snapshot of the goal has us think the D don't know where to be or make bad plays, when they are trying to do their job AND the forwards job at the same time. There are many times the Sabres are defending a 3 on 3 but the defenseman have to play it as if it's a 3 on 2 because they just can't rely on the forwards to make a correct decision. When a goal is scored, it looks easy to place that on the D, But oftentimes it is the consistent lack of smart positioning or effort from the forwards that is more at fault, and we simply blame the defense as being bad, when it's not always true. I want my defense to do 3 primary things: 1. Don't make mistakes in your own zone. 2. Get the puck out of your own zone. 3. Cover up for mistakes that the forwards make in your own zone. The biggest weakness this defense has is they're not good enough to do #3, and often they look worse than they are when trying.

So now what? The things that no-one wants to hear. Patience and waiting and hope by the time that is done they aren't too far out of the picture. -Muddle through till Thompson gets back and plays close to 100% -Cozens and Tuch have obviously been playing hurt at least part of the time, get them back to 100% -Samuelsson, hopefully you can get him back soon and to 100% Figure out the lineup, make a decision to play your best 12 forwards and best 6 d-men, stop going 11/7....and pick 2 goalies and go with them.

Clifton I think is hit and miss. He has bad games, but if you view him as a good 3rd pair guy who can slot in occasionally as a 2nd pair guy, I'm good with him. I agree on Power and Samuelsson. Power, I thought most were too high on him last year, I saw a lot of tenative play from him. This year he seems to be a slight step behind even where he was last year. Samuelson can be good in his own end and on the PK, but he is never availaible. Samuelson IS 'good' for a young guy, and Power I think will be very good/great, but he isn't close to being there yet. Dahlin had a slow start but is playing better the last 2 weeks. He is bordering on Elite, but he won't be by the end of the year if you keep running him into the ground. Overall, the D couuld be better, but I'm not upset with their play. Even Johnson. To me this teams primary shortcoming is they just aren't scoring goals they way they were last year, AND if you look at the goals allowed (look not just at the 1-2 seconds before the goal was scored but watch how the play develops for 5-10 seconds before), it is STILL the forwards that are often hanging the D out to dry with the forward's awful positioning that the D-men are often out of postion to try to cover up for mistakes in the D-zone by the forwards.