mjd1001

Whenever the 'experts' who follow the draft class are asked to rank where he is as a prospect, I hear the same thing from most of them.....equal to or slightly better than Matthews, not as good as McDavid. (The 'slightly' better than Matthews thing I cynically think they just say because he is Canadian and Matthews is an American. In the eyes of Canadian media, every prospect who is Canadian gets their stock 'bumped up 5%' just because....they are a gold ole Canadian boy!) To me when I watch him play or see highlights of him, He is obviously good the results speak for themselves, but nothing 'scares' me if I am playing him like McDavid. He's not big. He isn't blazing fast. He doesn't have the hardest shot. He just seems like a 'good' prospect, that has that intangible factor that takes him from good to great...its just not a particular typical measurable skill.

That would be nice. I think the team and him might not make a decision until the offseason, and if this is his last year, It might be more likely to have a "Klye Okposo day" early in the season next year. Just so he can keep his options open in the offseason to possibly return to the team, or in case any other team wants to throw a good one year contract at him for his leadership/depth role (if he moves back to Minnesota, would they consider giving him a one year veteran deal that he might accept?)

Power has a long way to go to reach his potential. Apparently a lot of his analytical numbers are good, but they don't tell the whole story. He is getting over 23 minutes of ice time per game, so the coaching staff sees something in him, but I think a lot of that is more about developing him than it is just how aweseome he is game in and game out. Don't get me wrong he's not bad, he is actually really really good 'for his age', but his level of play on a contending team to me is for a 2nd pair guy with 17-19 minutes per game, not the 23 he is averaging. Again, part of that is he is good enough where he isn't killing the team and you want him exposed to all situations...and the other part of is is how bad your depth is behind him. Overall I think he is playing average-to-above average, which actually is great for his age. Playing him so much might be part of the plan to get him experience so it doesn't take him 5 years to get him to be 'elite', you are trying to move that timetable forward a bit. He might have been put into the Calder conversation because of his draft status (1st overall) and his age (look how much ice time he is getting for how young he is), but his play, while decent AND will likely continue to improve, isn't Calder level.

That kinda ties into what was the true goal of the team this year. Peterka and Quinn may have been up here because it was indeed good for their development, but overall they may not have helped the team as much as a couple of mid-priced Vets on 1 or 2 year deals would have (at least not early in the year). This year managment may have thought of as 'we WANT to make the playoffs but it still is a development year', allows for that. Next year, however, if they truly make moves in the offseason to push for the playoffs, you may see the young guys in Rochester....and had the Sabres made those moves last offseason, Quinn or Peterka (or both) may have been in Rochester.

I have thought about this a bit myself, mostly because before he was even traded to Buffalo, I heard a lot about he was an above average D-man that was young and had a lot of upside. Then he came to Buffalo.... My view, opinion, and I have not many facts to go on this but just how I feel...is he came here to a bad situation. The team was a mess, the coaching staff was a mess, and he (like a LOT of people) were not used correctly and forced to play a system they didn't like. He didn't perform well in that system, and as a result soured on the team in general. Both sides were good with him moving on. He goes to a better team and is allowed to play differently, and he is more engaged and his play gets better. In my mind, a great example of how you kinda 'ruin' a player by putting them in a bad situation/coaching situation.

My math is correct. Also, I just use percentages and different assumptions than you did.

Tom Barasso. Won rookie of the year AND the vezina as an 18/19 year old for the Sabres right out of high school.

I watched a few Vancouver games lately (the plus of having all the games on demand with hulu/Espn plus) and Elias Petterson. Most of us know he is good, but after watching him play a few games, he is even better than I thought. Almost 90 points this season, 33 goals, a plus player on a pretty bad team, and when you watch him and follow him around he passes the eye test. There are a lot of great players in the league now, but I think he can legit be in the conversationf or top 5 forwards in the league. With Vancouver being a west coast team with a lot of late starts, and as a team not getting much attention, just how good he is I think is overlooked.

The 42 percent that said near 90 points and possibly the playoffs...I used 90 points in my math (the current level needed to get the last wildcard and multiplied it by 42 percent. The 36 percent that said between 80-90...I used 85 points and multiplied that by 36 percent. The 6 percent that said 100 points and the playoffs..I multiplied 100 points by 6 percent. The final 16 percent were under 80, so I multiplied that '16' percent by 75 points. Do the math and you get about 86 points. I did it in my head previously and got 85...so the actual math as above is 86.

Here it is: -Looks like 6 percent said playoffs for sure -42 percent said 'near 90 points' and a chance for the playoffs -36 percent said between 80-90 points -14 percent said under 80 points. When re-reading the thread, I get the impression the overall/averge/median expectation was about 85 points, and a lot of "depends on how good the goaltending is". I'd say we are very close to those 'consensus' exectations.

This I agree with. I'm not sure if there are stats to back it up, but with goalies, it seems more random as to who is good and who isn't. The best plan? make sure every year you take a shot on one who is rated in the top 10. Every year. I looked at the top 5 goalies this year in terms of GAA, and then the top 10 in terms of Save percentage. This is where they were drafted: 6th round, 2nd round, 4th round, 3rd round, 3rd round, undrafted, 5th round, 1st round, 4th round, 3rd round, undrafted. What is the common thread? Most were drafted (meaning they were ranked in the top 10, give or take, in their draft class but few of them were prospects you needed to use a high pick on.) so the lesson? as you said, draft one every year, use that lottery ticket each and ever year and odds are you WILL get a few that turn into quality NHL guys. Its not like the Sabres are making much use of their lower draft picks as it is. Since the 2010 draft, here is the list of players drafted in the 3rd round or later that have made any kind of impact (even just playing in more than 82 NHL games in their entire CAREER): Linus Ulmark (A GOALIE!), Cal Peterson (A GOALIE!), Victor Olofsson, Will Borgen, Brandon Hagel, and Jacob Bryson. Take your 3rd or 4th round pick each year and draft the best goalie on your list.

Because doing so up until this point hasn't been part of the plan. If the GM/Hockey operations wanted to get through this year, evaluate and add this offseason, then there would be no reason to spend more money until this offseason. The thing to watch is to see how much they spend adding players to this team in the next year or two and how much/how quickly Dahlin gets in his next deal.

I agree with most of what you said. I have posted a lot of the same thoughts in many threads this morning, but they apply to the conversations in many threads. This team is NOT that far away. Look at New Jersey the last 3-4 years. They let their young guys play through things and got humliated some games. When they thought the time was right (when THEY thought it was, not on the fans timeline), they made some moves and then took a big jump. The Sabres may be in the same spot this coming offseason/season. BUT, this is where management needs to make the moves. inexperience is an issue, especially with the forwards. I'm going to say this over and over but as good as some of the young guys are right now (Quinn, Cozens), they are bad without the puck in the back 2 zones. Quinn has quietly taken the most steps forward this year in that regard, but Peterka, Krebs, even Cozens WILL hopefully get better with expereince but the can be dreadful without the puck in their own zone (Cozens is a good forechecker, maybe 2nd best to Tuch on the team but he can positially be a disaster in the middle and back zones). With 1-2 more guys on the backend, and with good goaltending, you can cover up a lot of your deficiencies by the forward group WHILE they gain expereince and get better. I don't know what the answer is at goaltender....but this team getting even average goaltending next year AND more depth on the back end probably leads to them being in the playoffs next year. You don't need to re-tool the entire roster. 2-3, maybe 4 strategic moves/additions are all you need. Management is on the clock to do that this offseason.

When I watch this team and see the breakdowns which are primarily responsible for the fall in the standings, I see 3 primary things the team is lacking, and in this order, what they do not have now: 1. Good goaltending. 2. Forward play that is good without the puck in the neutral zone and in their own end. 3. Depth and experience (and health) at the bottom of your D-corp. Coaching doesn't fix the first one you need better and healthier goaltenders. Coaching will help the 2nd one FOR SURE, but it isn't going to happen right away. Guys who are awful without the puck and in their own zone (Peterka, Cozens, Krebs) that are still young WILL get better with coaching, but as I posted in another thread, they will take small steps on a season-to-season basis, they will not take big steps on a week-to-week or even month-to-month basis. Would a different coach help this issue? I'm not sure, but even if it did, the change would not be immediate. The Defensive depth...the ONLY thing I wish Granato did differently is not give his top guys SO much ice time. Would Dahlin be playing better and possibly not as injured with a bit less ice time? probably. Would Samuelsson not be injured with less ice time? He gets injured a lot but maybe the situation would be better with less ice time. You need to bring in better 2nd and 3rd pair guys so you can give your top guys a bit less ice time. I can listen to and possibly beleive the argument than this team is not a 90 point team, they are closer to an 80 point team but it was coaching that 'overused' the top D-men that kept this team on a 90 point pace until the D-group just broke down. Bottom line, I'm not changing the coach until the goaltending is better and there is patience with the players themselves getting more experience and, espeically the forwards, playing better without the puck. Other than Zemgus, there really is no player on this team that is both a full-effort guy AND a guy that knows where to be without the puck in ALL zones.

Better goaltending is the key to this team taking a step forward next year. I think that is obvious to many. BUT, when you watch many of the goals allowed, break down the goals, look at the replays of the goals allowed frame-by-frame, you will see the backend might be a little less responsible for those goals being allowed and the forwards helping out/being in position is more responsible than this board overall wants to place blame for. That is not saying the backend can't get better. Power hopefully will be better. Samuelsson needs to be healthy, and they need at least one other guy who is a legit '2nd pair' quality guy back there to play either on the 2nd or 3rd pair. That will help for sure. But besides goaltending, the BEST way to keep the puck out of the Sabres net is for the forwards, as a group, to be better. Quinn has improved a lot since earlier in the year but he still loses a lot of battles. Peterka needs to improve in this area. Cozens is a very good player overall, but anyone who thinks he is a good 2-way player needs to really watch an isolation of his game as he is awful without the puck in the back two zones. I'm glad Krebs has gotten better, because in the first month of the season he may have been the single worst player in the league without the puck (he got better but still has a lot of work to do). But you know what? That is what you get with most young guys. When you have talent that was taken in the first round, it usually is for offensive ability, and the play without the puck must be learned though experience, and with some guys that is a gradual, year-to-year process, not something that happens over the course of a few games. Now, the young guys on this team will hopefully get better by next year, but again, 'better' doesn't mean good. And if you are hoping to add some other new guys to this team (Kulich, Savoie, or any of the other young guys), you are going to be dealing with even more bad play in your own end. Coaching is what is going to make those guys progress eventually, but no coach is going to turn them into D-zone stars overnight. If you add 2 or 3 of your young guys to this roster, D-zone coverage is likely to be worse next year by the forwards than it is now. Therefore, goaltending becomes critical. You give this team average-to-above average goaltending next year that is consistentent, they are likely making the playoff.

I don't think you fire him now. Give him a few more tools to work with. When the Sabres get better goaltending, then figure that into the results. See how this team responds next year to the finish this year. If the wheels are still falling off next year at this time, then you think about it.

I only have one fanatics product...replica Coyotes jersey. Its fine, no problems. Wear it often, it gets thrown in the wash and dryer with a variet of other stuff...dozens and dozens of times now. Looks brand new and its pretty comfortable.

I became a Sabres fan as a really young kid (probably before even a Bills fan) in the 1980's and I just assumed they were always good enough to be in the playoffs. I never even considered the team missing the playoffs. (even though it happend 2 times, that was 2 playoff misses and 19 playoff appearances over 21 seasons) As a one time expansivion franchise, 'small market' franchise, going through bankruptcy, the Sabres played 40 seasons under those conditions: -29 out of 40 seasons making the playoffs. -33 of those 40 seasons having 50% or more of all available points in a season. -11 of those 40 seasons having at least 60% of available points (over a 100 point pace in todays 82 game schedule) and that was before the 'loser point' was available in over time. -Longest streak without playoffs was 3 in a row. -Yes, it was easier to make the playoffs back then, but had a streak of 11 seaons in a row and one of 8 seasons in a row of playoff appearances, Since the 2011-2012 season (Pegula's first full season as ownership), where the sole existence for the franchise was to win a cup, where money would not longer be an issue to acheiving that goal: -If they don't make it this year, it will be 0 out of 12 seasons of missing the playoffs. -This season might be the 2nd one with over 50% of the points, if they hold on to that this year. -0 seaons with over 60% of avialable points. Not even close one time to this. -12 years in a row, perfect record of not making the playoffs. -7 different coaches in those 12 seasons. Each one with a losing record in the last 12 years. 4 different GM's 2 first overall picks, 2 2nd overall picks. They made 10 selections in the top 10 in the draft. We have gone over and over whether it is Terry's fault for the Sabres problems. Most say yes, some say no, some say as an owner he needed a learning curve, etc, etc. What stands out is they actually were one of the top franchises in winning percentages and playoff appearances while operating under that 'low budget'.....and the moment that we all rejoiced that a 'rich owner' was taking over the team and saying money would be spent to acheive the goals, we have probably seen the worse stretch by any team in the history of professional American sports that reached this length. (modern times, for myself speaking in the last 40 or so years.)

I think that pretty much is it. Some more detail" -Hope for a heathy (healthier) back end (Dahlin must be playing hurt, he is a different player the last few weeks.) Healthy Samuelsson, add one, maybe 2 quality mid pair guys back there. -Continued offensive end growth by Peterka and Quinn. -Better D-zone and neutral-zone-without-the-puck play by the young forwards. Peterka, Krebs, Cozens, VO (if he is playing)...all must have a full season of much better play without the puck. I think the shortcomings of this team are obvious and not too difficult to address. I'm not overly worried. This team could have been better right now had more been done this past offseason, but I don't think that was 'part of the plan'. The plan was to put this young team together on the ice and see what they can (and can't) do. I also think the plan always was THIS offseason coming up was when you start addressing needs in a bigger way. Hopefull that is what we'll see.

I didn't say the Sabres PK was decent, I said it was decent WHEN Girgensons, Jost and Samuelsson our out there. Not overal, but when they get the bulk of the PK time. I personally think Girgeonsons is the best PK on this team, but Jost is decent also, hence why I wondered why he was taken out of the lineup unless he is hurt.

Colorado all of a sudden on a 5 game win streak. 2 games in hand on everyone above them in the standings. If, IF they win those 2 games (more likely that when we say that about the Sabres doing it), they would be leading their division, 2nd place in the conference, and only 2 points behind the conference lead. Maybe they were just having that post Stanely Cup hangover early in the year, and now they are coming on as being just as good as the Easter Conference teams....with liklely a much easier path (and one that might wear them down less) to the cup than anyone coming out of the east. Of their next 5 upcoming games they have Chicago, Arizona twice and Anaheim.

I agree with most of what you said, with the exception of Cozens. Cozens D-zone coverage is awful. He leaves his man often, chases pucks and leaves the slot open where he should have coverage, etc. Its easy to think he SHOULD be a good 2-way forward because he forechecks aggressively and hits, but he is really, really bad in terms of D-zone coverage. The part I agree with you on is that it isn't just him, the whole group of forwards is really bad. And as for the PK, I'm not sure Jost isn't hurt or something, because the PK is decent when you have Jost, Girgensons, and Samuelsson out there. They are the 3 best PK'ers on the team. I'm not sure why Jost is out of the lineup and his 4th line/PK role.

10 games ago, the Sabres were well within the wildcard race, with some fans feeling confident they would make it in. 10 games later, the Sabres have 6 points in their last 10 games. Only 3 other teams in the league have less points over their last 10 than the Sabres. Its been a tough schedule, but this is the opposite of 'stepping up' when under pressure to make the playoffs.

A lot of us were burying Tampa, saying they were done, the Sabres had a chance to catch them, if the played the Leafs they were going to get swept, etc, etc. The Sabres aren't catching them, they may still lose to the leafs, but they now won 3 in a row, including back to back over New Jersey, and are within 3 points of Toront in the standings again.

I agree with most of that, if not all of it, and I'm ok with it. you NEED some extra help on the backend, but most of your expected growth should come from within/additonal development of the young guys.