mjd1001

If I am going to defend Granato when things go bad, I have to try pretty hard but not THAT hard. Maybe another evolution of the NHL is that a head coach can be more of a guy like Granato and less like what we had in the past to be effective. A counter point would be Ralph Krueger. For the most part, he was well spoken and seemed like a 'nice guy', but as far as coaching, it was his way and his way only. We see a perfect example of this that Granato was ON HIS STAFF but must have had very little input because the coaching style/operation of the team was so much different under both of them. So where am I going? Less of a 'everything runs through me' type of coach and more of a CEO. Kinda like an NFL coach where they delegate a lof of the actual 'coaching' to experts. Your head coach can be the one who runs the general direction of the team. When to practice. How much to practice. What to focus those practices on. If a decision NEEDS to be made on gameday, he is the final say (bench a guy if need be, double shift someone). But beyond that, you hire a PP specialist to run/teach the PP, a SH guy for the same. I seem to remember Ted Nolan openly admitted he wasn't that great on the x's and o's so I remember he would call a timeout and one of the assistents would have the white board setting up the play with the guys on the ice while Nolan stood back and watched. It doesn't have to be EXACTLY that way but I think Granato can succeeed in a role like that. Plus its not like he doesn't know x's and o's...or he doesn't know how to coach....he has been around the AHL and NHL in various roles and has seen other coaches do 'their thing'. The GM position has evolved. Presidents of hockey Operations are psuedo-gms. Some have more power than the GM, some leave the hockey decisons to the GM but operate at a differnent level. There is no set rules form team to team. I guess what I am saying is...if Granato isn't the best coach for this team based on how we judged coaches in the past or how we judge them today, that doesn't mean he might not be good in tomorrows (or next years) game. And Yes, with this post I am reaching for a way to justify how he could be kept around long term if it looks like he has shortcoming...but if the game is always evolving, players are evolving, strategy and training are evolving...how about trying to be part of the evolution of coaching and how a team is coached?

Well, here is the 'problem' or at least the nature of social media/message boards: There are some people who don't like Granato. There are some people that do like Granato. After a winning streak, the ones who like Granato will make their voices heard. After a losing streak or a bad loss, those who don't like his as coach have their time to speak. Its the nature of things. The same behavior happens on the Bills forum or talk radio. When the team wins a game by passing the ball all over, people say its great they play like that. When they lose, people complain "they need to run more!" The common complaint is that people will complain no matter what they do. That isnt exactly true. You aren't hearing people complain 'no matter what', what you are doing is hearing DIFFERENT people complaining based on the most recent events of the team. If/when the Sabres go on a 3-4 game winning streak, I highly doubt there will be a lot of complaining about Granato as coach. If/when they lose 3-4 in a row there will be calls that he isn't the guy. Its not so much people changing their mind...it is just the same 'different people' capitilizing in the situation to make their point.

So much of the talk around him was whether he would become a free agent or not...and very little about how good he actually was becoming.....that I have NO IDEA at all how good he is. He is a late first rounder. Great. That was a few years ago. How has he progressed or regressed, If he does sign does he help this team now (is he better than someone like Bryson who has less talent but more experience)? What is he likely to be in a couple years from now? I have zero idea.

I posted soemthing like this in a differerent thread but I think it applies to the comments you made here also. When the Sabres lose, I don't see it as a lack of overall talent, or a lack of effort, or a lack of toughness. I see it has 20% "puck luck" due to the style they play (D-men push up the ice so much, sometimes it helps you score, sometimes you get caught up the ice and it burns you), but 80% is mistakes or bad positioning. Against playoff teams, they have enough experience that they will 'counter punch' what you do. They have film on the Sabres, they know how they play. Those good, experienced teams wait for the Sabres to make a mistake or be out of position and then caplitilize on it. The Sabres can get away with it agains 'lesser' teams because the Sabres either have just more talent, OR the 'lesser teams' positioning is just as bad as the Sabres and they aren't in position to capitilize on it. A GREAT goaltender can also cover up a lot of the mistakes the Sabres make, but they don't have that right now. And Yes, the Sabres make a lot of mistakes especially with positioning on their goals allowed. But I think that comes from the lack of experience and lack of communication. Those things should get better over time. It won't all happe in a week or two though, it might take a half season, a season, or more.

I watched some of the goals allowed and think that the lack of Grit and them 'folding' wasn't a huge issue last night. The goals the allowed, they were mostly players being out of position or making mistakes. Bring in 'more grit' like when Risto was here (maybe a bad example he really isn't that good) and many of those players make MORE mistakes just to make a hit. The goals they allowed last night were a result of bad line changes (Samuelson carrying the puck up the ice, falling down leaving no one back on D at all because that exact moment Power left the ice on a change), Forwards out of position in the D-zone (Thompson going to the boards, the D-men getting split and Skinner/Tuch not covering the vacated open zones), Bad SH positioning (Lybushkin chasing the puck to the boards, and instead of Krebs covering the spot, he follows Lybushkin litterly 3 feet behind him to the same spot leaving the slot open). Also, the Sabres style of play is to push the puck up the ice. D-men pinch and join the rush. SOME games doing that is going to be the reason you score a few goals and win, other games the bounces will not go your way and it will be the reason you lose. It just happens. The best team in the NHL doesn't win every game, and the style the Sabres play leads to having some bad goals allowed. Those things are not corrected by extra effort, "Grit" or "Balls". Those things are corrected with experience, knowing your linemates and partners evern BETTER and much better communication on the ice. ALL teams have games where those mistakes are made. Young teams have more games like that. Teams like Boston aren't that much more talented than everyone else, they are successful because they make the FEWEST mistakes like that. Now, I'm not saying that having another '100% effort, all the time guy' or a bigger, physical guy added to this roster wouldn't make them better. It might and probably would. But not having that guy is not the reason they lost last night. Inexperience, bad positioning, and a few plays where players didn't backcheck hard/made bad decisions/or had bad giveaways (Krebs, Krebs, Krebs, and one time Quinn and Skinner) are the reason.

This year New Jersey is currently 3rd in the league in points. Hughes is playing like one of the top 5 forwards in the league. Last year they were FIFTH WORST in the league. Hughes missed some games last year but even when he played the team wasn't as good as it is this year. The point? Young teams take time. They take a step forward from being an average team to a very good team when they are ready, NOT when the fan base wants.

I think hes fine. Development of players, that is his specialty, that is what he did, and it appears that is what he is doing here. Is there a problem with him as far as strategy/x's and o's? I don't know if there is or not, that might be his weakness. If it IS, then you get an assistent coach who has that as a strength. Certain head coaches have the "I'm the head coach, things are done my way" vibe. Granato doesn't seem like that is the case with him (at least to me). If he has a specific weakness in an area of strategy, Adams and Granato can/need to talk about that in the offseason, and if there is a deficiency, bing in an assistent to help. I'd rather have Granato as head coach/ "CEO behind the bench" who may or may not lack in one area that you can bring in help with.......RATHER than have a great Strategy/gameday guy behind the bench that lacks in the areas Granato has strength in.

Maybe an experienced guy would help, but what I see is not the lack of a certain type of player back there. I see Power as a good young D-man who, because of his inexerpence, usually plays well but often has some pretty bad games. I see the 6th D-man on this team as missing. I seeLybushkin as a pretty good 4, 5 guy who can play phyiscial but he seems to be playing beat up all the time. The biggest thing I see though when they allow goals is a D-corp that is young overall and doesn't make too many physical mistakes but makes 'young guy' out of position mistakes. I think this exact same group on D will be better next year, and a LOT better in 2 years from now when they all have more experience. Of course, that Vet guy would help right now to take a couple minutes off of Power and to take all the minutes from a struggling Clague/Bryson/whoever else.

This is a streaky young team that seems to win when you are pretty sure they are 'done' and expect them to lose, but on the other hand just when you think they are playing good a losing streak starts. Right now fans have lost faith in the team again...so maybe that will signal a turn around to playing well? That is all I got, I'm not epecting much from them in the next two games myself.

Excpet Anderson stopped 17 out of 18 shots he faced after he took over, only allowing 1 PP goal where the team in front of him had 2 players take themselves out of position. Then again, if he STARTED the game when Toronto put all that pressure on...maybe he wouldn't have done as well.

He is really young for a Goalie. Many young goalies seem to go through very hot and very cold streaks. I think he'll be fine....BUT I would say now would be a time to get Comrie 4 out of the next 6 games and see how he does.

Tied for 3rd worst in the league with 11 home wins. Tied for 4th best in the league with 17 away victories. If only they were even a .500 team at home. (actually if they were .500 at home they would currently have 66 points and be the first wild card team with games in hand over most the other teams)

14 points in their last 10 games, wins over Tampa and Nashville included, and played a good game and lost in OT vs a streaking Kings team. Arizona isn't 'good' but they are improving.

I am not a big coffee drinker, so I end up at a Tim Hortons maybe 3-4 times per year, but it always amazed me how slow and disorganized they are inside. For mostly making drinks or basic sandwiches and serving pastries, it usually amazes me how long it takes for the line to move and just how many people they can squeeze behind the counter that look like they are trying to avoid bumping into each other more than actually being productive.

Just the 'eye' test without looking at any replays: (and I watched most of the game but did miss a few minutes here and there) -Dahlin wasn't at his best. He's not the reason they lost, but this wasn't a 'norris trophy' candidate game. -Quinn looked good. Not just because he scores, but a few times I noticed him being a big more agressive and around the puck more. -Power. Looked like a typical 19 year old Rookie tonight..tenative, made some mistakes. -Krebs. He he does get out of position, or plays against quicker/faster teams, his lack of speed is noticable and can cause him/the team problems. -Cozens. Not a typical Cozens game. Usually I notice 2 or 3 really good things and a couple of really bad things he does. I dont' want to say he was invisible, but while he didn't contribute offensively, he also didn't make any glaring mistakes. Not a bad game, but not a 'typical Cozens' game. (from what I saw)

Powerdidn't look great tonight. A few mistakes whiffed on the puck a couple times. For the first time in a while he looked like a 19 year old rookie.

D-units are not communicating well with each other. As good as Krebs has been playing the past month or two..when he is against quicker/faster compeition, his lack of speed is obvious and gets him/the team in trouble.

would love to see the reaction in Toronto if St. Louis got Meier for a mid level prospect, Toronto's first this year, and MAYBE a future first. If they were to get Meier for marginally more than what Toronto gave up for the ROR deal...it might be some fun talk radio up there.

Last year I remember working in the garage and listening to the Sabres broadcast on the smart speaker I have there. This year that went away, now the 'radio' broadcast is 'blackouted' on my smart speaker where in the past it never was. I also brought this topic up in a previous thread a few months ago. Our daughter and her boyfriend, my nephew, and a niece I have are all under 26 years of age are/were Sabres fans. They do not have traditional cable, only streaming channels. Being local, they haven't watched a Sabres game at home in a few years. I talk to our daugher and her boyfriend all the time, but over the holidays I talked to that niece and nephew and the story is the same with all of them...they can't watch the games with streaming, they won't even think about getting a traditional cable package just for the Sabres, and they aren't as big of fans as they used to be because of it. My nephew still watches hockey and says he wants the Sabres to win (he is 21 now) but he says he picked a new team to follow, and now he is a pretty big Panthers Fan because he can watch every game they play through Hulu/espn.

All of the choices have some argument for them, but in terms of what you can get for what it would cost, the 3rd pair D-man is the choice I would make. Get a guy who has 2nd pair talent and put him on the 3rd pair....and that is the biggest upgrade you can get without trading a ransom.

He is so young I'm not worried. Normally takes about a half a season for really young guys to adjust to the AHL. Quinn, Mitts, and a lot of other young players need the first 20-30 games at least in the AHL to adjust befoe they start playing better...if not a full year in the AHL.

Maybe this should go under the 'complaint thursday' thread but since it deals with games like this I will put it here. When ANY east coast team plays ANY west coast team on the weekend, it should be an afternoon game. If the West coast teams want weekend night games they can have those against other division opponents/west coast opponents. You should do whatever you can to minimize the number of times your 'eastern time zone fans' have a 10pm or later start to watch. On the other hand, when a West coast team visits the eastern time zone, ALL of those games are night games. None of your west coast fans should have a morning-local-time start to their road games on TV (I think the Sabres had an afternoon game they hosted a western team this year? If the Sabres want afternoon games, make them against east coast teams). I know the schedule is more complicated than some fans think, with Arena availabilty and such, but this isn't about changing the entire schedule, a lof of this could be altered to make it more fan-friendly for everyone.

Toronto should have a shot at competing for a deep playoff run for quite a few years now. As I stated above I think their BEST shot is in the next 2 years, but if they resign matthews, they will have Matthews, Marner, and Nylander for 4-5 more years with them ALL under 30 years of age, and have a still useful Tavares for a least a couple more. You really shouldn't worry about the future 5 years from now (when this pick they traded might be useful and contributing). The Leafs have to take their shot now. The biggest problem they have is not their team, but the rest of the league, the divisions, the playoff format, and just how all of that is falling the last few years. To win the cup, Toronto could possibly have to: 1.) beat a Tampa team that is the conference champs, that beat them last year, AND has pulled ahead of them this year (statistically at least). 2.) Beat a Boston team that, for most of this season, was playing like the best team we saw in the league in decades. 3.) Beat a team as good as Carolina in the next round, who is well ahead of you in the standings, and over the past month playing better than anyone, indcluding both you and Boston. 4.) Then beat in a 7 game series the best of all the teams that come out of the West (A McDavid/Draisatle led Edmonton team, a potentially dominant Colorodo team if they get healthy maybe?)

The Huberdeau contract really doesn't look good, and the biggest issue with it is down the road, not right now. However, I think the best thing the Flames could do is change coaches from Sutter and move on. He has a Mike Keenan/Torts vibe to me. 'Old school hockey' guy, that works well for a year or two but never gets you over the top..but ultimately turns off some players. Some people love guys like his as a coach. I think long term for the franchise they are better with someone else. Looking at the Flames coaching history, they like their 'old time hockey' guys and former players as coaches. In the past 25 years they have been coached by Brian Sutter, Daryll Sutter (twice), and Brent Sutter. Throw in a stint by Mike Keenan also.

Its a good deal for both teams. ROR has been injured this year, but the 'eye test' shows he has lost more than one step (due to age or injuries), and so do his basic stats. But he STILL is a defensively sound, 3rd or 4th line center who can contribute offensively. If leaf fans think they are getting a Selke quality Center they are mistaken, but he still will be above average defensively and will put up some goals. He HELPS Toronto this year. Personally, I would have waited to see if i could have gotten something better if I'm giving away my first rounder, but he SHOULD make the Leafs better. Don't forget, Acciari isn't nothing either. He is a depth piece for sure, but a player who has scored 20 before and this year...on a bad team, was on pace for the mid teens in goals. That isn't nothing...if you have an injury he is a piece than can fill a hole. Finally for the Leafs, they have a window for the next 5 years with this roster, but the biggest part of that window is the next 2 years. Even if this is a 'deep' draft, whoever they were going to get was not going to help this core win a cup, they would be years away. You can't get out of the first round, you have the most talented core of forwards that you have seen in decades, they are all entering their prime now....do what you need to do to WIN NOW! If they think he makes the better on the ice, and he does provide depth, go for it. And they got a rental back. Normally that is a bad thing but for them....it may be good. They don't have to worry about fitting in an existing deal under their cap next year. As for St. Louis, they need a teardown. They are an aging team. They have less than a handful of young guys to build around...and while a couple of them are very good, none are franchise level superstars. I think they have picked above 15th overall like one time in the past decade. They have an aging, fading team that is no where near the cup, going the wrong way, and just about nothing young coming up to turn that around. They desperately need a tear-down/rebuild...maybe even mroe so than that Sabres 'needed' it a decade ago when they started theirs.