mjd1001

I know we all have our opinions on players and that differs from person to person. I also know that every player is not universally liked. I am, however, still unclear about the rush to move on from Girgensons. Over the last few years, he has proven to be a good penalty killer. Eye test says he is rarely out of position on the PK, and over the last few years he is usually in the middle of the team or the upper part of the team in terms of stats for how many PK goals he is on the ice for. He is not 'over the hill'. He is a pretty quick skater. If you look at his scoring per 60 minutes hes actually not bad at all, maybe above average for a 4th liner. Now if he were to come to KA and demand a huge increase in salary over a long term deal of course you move on, but for what you are likely to pay him, I want him back for sure.

I never really like expansion teams when they come into the league, but the Coyotes I have grown to like a little bit. I was hoping this would pass so they would stay there. I guess once a team develops a fan base (no matter how small) I hate seeing them move.

I grew up with the Yankees and Blue Jays, Yankeest first that that has kinda swapped. Most things about the Yankees I shouldn't like now, but because I always liked them growing up, I still follow them more than I used to. Boston is a tough one for me. I hated them growing up. But I went to a few games when I lived there, I think Fenway is really fun and just had some good times going to their games. But when it comes down to it, I guess I have to say the Blue Jays. It would be a lot stronger with them if, for the past 20 years or so living in WNY we could have seen their games on TV. We are up in Niagara county, when I drive down the hill from Niagara University to Lewiston you can see the stadium across the lake on a clear day, Buffalo has been their farm club for a while....Yet local cable tv over the year has shown the Yankees, Mets, Braves....but no Blue Jays.

I'd have to agree with what you say with the slight change of Dallas and Carolina are interchangeable. I'm just happy Toronto is out. I grew up watching them 2nd only to the Sabres, at times I liked the team, but wow, that fanbase makes them very hard to root for. Even in defeat they think they are better than any other fanbase, their team is better than any other team just everyone is out to get them, that every player they have if the decide to trade them should be for NHL stars AND multiple picks...and every free agent wants to play there just because they are the Maple leafs. The leafs have many qualities for a team I can root for (mostly they are one I did root for earlier in my life), but just reading a few posts on their boards or listening to thier talk radio..and they make it hard for me to do that. I lived in Boston for a few years and I found it alot easier to talk to Bruins fans than I do Leaf fans.

I agree with your sentiment overall. Montour is the best example. And while the Sabres were bad at pretty much everything over most of the last decade (coaching, development, drafting....), I think you can put this on Drafting players more than anything. Eichel is who he is, there really was no other player you were going to pick at that spot. Reinhart? You could have had Draisaitl or Nylander there. But the bigger issue with the Sabre is look at the rest of who they picked. Over the last 15-20 years, only Arizona might have a worse draft history than the Sabres (not couting the last couple years.) We are all hoping the team is turning around now, but really since Pegula took over the Sabres have been one of the worst at drafting, and coaching, and scouting, and player development. You have a playoff drought of a few years when you are bad at one or two of those things. You have a massive playoff drought when you are bad at pretty much all of them.

I'm not really intersted in Hellebuyck. Not for what it would probably cost. Yes, I want the team to get better, but I am enjoying the 'ride up' with seeing the current guys get better. Now, if Winnipeg and Hellebuyck would do something crazy like trade him for UPL, a 2nd, and one of the lower level prospects, AND Hellebuyck is willing to sign a 2-3 year extension for no more than $7..then sure do it. But if it cost more than that (and i'm pretty sure it WOULD cost more than that), I'm Ok with staying on the current path.

I don't like Seattle's unis that much, Dallas same thing. BUT, something about the Green Dallas unis vs the Whites on Seattle, it looks pretty nice on the ice.

Yes it is a long way of saying just that. The advantage an expansion team has is they are going to have a huge list of those late 20-year-old guys avaible to pick from that existing teams don't. If they do things the right way, they can be playoff-competitive a lot quicker than a team rebuilding from nothing.

Ok, I am not saying the Sabres couldn't have had/shouldn't have had some guys like this and that is why Seattle is better. There are a LOT of small reasons added up why they are playing good. But I think one is overlooked often: Roster composition. Specifically the age of players. You don't need to have the 'best players' if the players you DO have are all in the prime of their career. It is easier to do that with an expansion team now, harder with an existing team. With an existing team that has been trying to win for a while, you have some guys in the prime of their career, but you also have some guys that WERE in the prime of their career when you signed them years ago and are now not as good as they were but are still taking up a large part of the cap. You may also have some 'younger guys' working their way up through the system on that team who are playing (out of cap necessity) but aren't as good yet as they are going to be eventually. Seatte may not have the high end talent of other teams, but what they DO have is a team full of guys talented enough to play in the NHL AND are mostly in the prime of their career. I looked at the guys who were on the ice the most for them the entire year. Their top 6 minute guys on Defense are aged 30, 26, 30, 26, 32, and 28. No one 'over the hill' for a defensmen but all mature enough to know what they are doing. Top end talent? Maybe not, but you have no guys back there who are 'too old and hanging on' or 'too young and making mistakes'. Much is the same with them up front. The only guy you have under 24 in their top 12 (minutes played) is Berniers, that is it. Gourde and Eberle are the oldest guys though at 32 and 31. Almost everyone else is in their middle to late 20's. Again, the most talented group? No, but no one is 'too old to keep up' and no one is 'too young/too inexeprienced'.

Who is the harder working team....Seattle or Carolina?

The lottery hasn't really eliminating 'tanking' in any of its recent forms. Maybe it has cut down on a team just going all out, trying to be the worst team ever? Not sure. I DO like the current idea where you can only move up 10 spots.

No, the Leafs single biggest problem is that Matthews (and their other stars) just don't play as well in the playoffs as other stars around the league do. Its a large enough sample size to come to that conclusion. Over their careers, guys like McKinnon, Draisaitl, Kucherov, McDavid.....equal their regular season production or in many cases EXCEED it once the playoffs arrive. Matthews, Marner, and Tavares not only have their production drop in the playoffs, but it drops by a noticable amount, and this is now for their entire playoff careers. WHY that happens may be a differnet question, but, for the most part, their stars don't always show up once the playoffs start and that is pretty common with this team, year after year.

I posted this about to weeks ago. I grew up kinda liking the leafs, but the single biggest reason why I do not like them anymore is the CONSTANT complaining about the refs by their fans.

So, as others have said...... Eichel vs Reinhart (and Montour) for the Cup is looking more and more probable every day.

In an ideal world (one that the NHL/Junior leagues won't allow to happen), all players would be eligible to play in the minor leagues, in Buffalos case for either Rochester or Cincy. Depending on where a guy is in his development you could slot him where he best fits.

Every year after 3rd round (maybe the 2nd round) you should be picking a goalie: -In the past 5 seasons, look at the most successful goalies (in wins, who happen to be also close to the top in GAA and SV percentage). Only 2 were first rounders. 7 of the 10 were picked in the 3rd round or later. -On the other side of that, impact players taken later than the 3rd round in other players are few and far between. The sabres, since 2008, in the 3rd round and later, these are their most impactful non-goalie picks: Brayden McNabb, Marcus Foligno, Nick Baptiste, Olofsson, Will Borgen, Brandon Hagel, Jacob Bryson. That is it out of 79 total players picked over that time. In those same rounds they did Draft Portillo, UPL, Jonas Johansson, Cal Peterson, Linus Ulmark (among 2-3 other goalies) and this is not with them drafting one every year. Lets not forget Levi was a late round pick. Across the league goalies have a much better chance of being impact players, as with the Sabres own drafting, with later round picks than other positions. If you have a goalie ANYWHERE on your draft board close to where you are picking, you should be picking one every year in the middle to late rounds.

I dont' want him even for the Vet minimum, want no part of him. He is not going to do well on a 4th line in that role. Put him on a top line and I don't want that either because I'd rather have some of the younger guys get those minutes. I don't see a way I want him on this team at all, with the exception of 3-4 of the top 6 wingers on this team going down with injuries in camp. Even then, I'd probably rather write off the year than have Kane there.

Doesn't really bother me where he is. Yes, I get it, he is likely to be great. Generational. A step behind McDavid but close. But we have had generational talent in the past few decades and it hasn't ruined competition in the league. Crosby as "the next great one" has 3 cups while he is going into is 19th year. Ovechkin may be the best scorer the league has ever seen and he has 1 cup while going to his 19th season. McDavid is in his 8th year and no cups (yet). Joe Thornton wasn't quite generational, but he was probably as close to it coming out (there were some who called him generational when drafted) and in 24 years, no cups. Eric Lindros was generational FOR SURE, may have had as much hype as McDavid and more than Bedard coming out, and in 13 years no cups (the first part of his career he was fairly healthy). I'd be less 'worried' he would ruin my teams chances....and would rather have him play in my own division so I could see him play more often. I'm glad we have great players to watch, but I think the NHL is a league where a guy isn't going to turn competition on its head. If McDavid and Crosby have 3 cups between them in 26+ seasons combined I'm not worried about that. Plus Chicago has a long way to go. They have a lot of 1st round picks coming up to help them, but many of those high picks are going to be later in the draft, and they are starting with almost nothing right now. They are 'set up' well for the future, but there is a LOT of heavy lifting. I'd be afraid if we had a guy like Mario Lemieux coming into today's NHL. I think Lemieux playing in the NHL of 2023 would be unstoppable. He could carry a bad team to the cup, but I haven't seen a talent like Lemieux since, well, since Mario Lemieux.

I really don't know much at all about just how good any of these players are, or how good of a fit they will be with the Sabres. So specifically, I really can't comment on any names in particular with any level of confidence. All I know is I want 2 NHL quality D-men to be aquired, and once we hear who they are, I want to be pretty easily convinced they will help a lot. I don't need much more from this offseason other than that. A Dahlin extension at a good number would be great.

Sometimes picking high works really well (usually does) but sometimes it doesn't. I was surprised looking back at the draft history of Ottawa in their first few years. Starting in 1992 and for the next 5 years, they picked: 2nd overall, 1st overall, 3rd overall, 1st overall , and 1st overall. 3 first overall picks, and 5 years picking in the top 3. What did it get them? Yashin, Daigle (Pronger went next), Bonk, Bryan Berard and Chris Phillps. Chicago is lucky to pick in a year where there is a 'generational' talent. Ottawa was just unlucky that they picked that high in a few years where not much came out of those drafts for years.

I was wondering so I looked up who were the last 15 players taken in the draft at #13, to get an idea of how good that pick is/can be: Frank Nazar, Matthew Coronato, Seth Jarvis, Spencer Knight, Ty Dellandrea, Nick Suzuki, Jake Bean, Jakub Zboril, Jakub Vrana, Josh Morrissey, Radek Faska, Sven Baertschi, Branden Gormley, Zack Kassian (last time the Sabes picked 13th), and Colton Teubert. Other guys available in those years taken within a couple picks of 13th that were still on the board then (picks 14-17): Cole Caufield, Charly McAvoy, Jacob Chychrun, Matthew Barzal, Dylan Larkin, Sonny Milano, Alex Tuch, Tom Wilson, Tomas Hertl, J. T. Miller, Vladmir Tarasenko,

That's gotta stick. Would be in the top 10 nicknames ever.

I picked 6 of the 8 first round series wrong. Playoffs are a different animal for sure in terms of expectations.

I am not as sure as others that Power will be a dominant D-man. I hope he will, and there are signs, but I think he still has a year or two at least to go until he is very good/great. But, I'm saying long term anyway. The best way to be a top team in the NHL is to take chances and sign your 'core' to long term deals. Overpay them in the early part of their contract so that in later years they aren't getting overpaid. With the commitments made to Cozens and Thompson, I say go all in...EVERYONE who identify an important piece going forward, lock up long term now. Overpay them now when you have the cap room.

I listened a bit to 590 today. Probably 20 minutes. Just one host and one guest talking, so not a lot of opinions, but in general: -You have to decide on the core. They seem 'entitled' and 'coddled'. If you trade just one of them, the 3 remaining guy will override any 'culture' that the new guy would bring in. If you are going to change the core, you need to move 2 of them. Tavares won't be moved because of his age/contract, so if you make some moves, 2 of the 3 of Matthews, Nylander, and Marner need to go. -As far as managment/coaching: Moves may be made here, but if you fire Keefe, its going to be a 'move to make a move' because he really has tried different things. Players clearly think they have control though, as when Keefe called them out as being 'soft' a while back, he had to 'walk back' those comments. Dubas actually did a good job the last few trade deadlines, not his fault. Shanahan? No one really knows what he does, if a member of management needs to go they think it should be Shanahan. -The guys on the station truly think the leafs are the most 'talented' team in the league. They did make one comment about running the current team out there 'one more year' and seeing how it goes, but then one guy said you have to make a decision on Matthews contract likely this offseason, so if there is even a chance you are going to make any changes, do so now. At least from the host/guest, there was not a lot of Angst, just almost a level of acceptance of the loss if the leafs end up not coming back from down 3 games.