mjd1001

A little off topic, but I had a discussion the other day about a 'players around the league issue' If/When there ever is another World cup of hockey, or Olympics, how close would the USA be now to matching Canada's top lines up front. With McDavid and McKinnon for Canada down the center, tough to match...but....the USA would be able to roll out somthing like: Mathews, Thompson, and Eichel at Centers....with Wingers including Jason Robertson, both Tkachuks, Jack Hughes (at C or wing) Gaudreau and Maybe Kreider or Kyle Conner. I might prefer Canada up front overall, but I could see a USA team/lineup like that having games where they are better.

Looks like light snow or flurries at kickoff for Sunday's game against the Jets, kinda-but-not-too windy, with a chance the light snow turns to drizzle by the end of the game. Not ideal conditions, but not bad enough to really take away anything the Bills want to do.

I like Dunleavy. I don't catch many mistakes he makes, and as Pimlach said, he does well as a 'nuetral' announcer but I like that. Sure, I loved RJ doing the games but in all honesty, I prefer guys that are a bit less excitable. Jack Edwards style...or the guy who used to (and maybe still does) the Penguins games? No thank you. On the other hand, The tv guy that I saw from San Jose (I watched part of the SJ broadcast for the Sabres game), he wasn't very loud but he was very good. So It took me a little while to get used to Dunleavy, but I like him. I'm happy he's the PBP guy for the team.

Right now this teams top 2 lines are playing great, and the 4th line is doing what you need them to do. The 3rd line is the glaring, gaping hole right now. What do you want in a 3rd liner? I want to focus one someone who can be somewhat productive with lesser minutes (doesn't need 17-20 minutes per game to produce) and can produce without PP time. Someoone with the basic skills that they CAN move up to a 2nd line in case of injuries. Hopefully someone in that 25-30 years of age category. Who is that? I have no idea. but I don't need a top 10 pick or a guy on pace to score 30+ goals. Just find me a guy who can get me 15, MAYBE 20 goals but does that with 3rd line minutes and minimal PP time. That will fill a major hole on this team.

Well with the extra point for OT losses, it is more possible than it used to be. 107 point pace was referenced a few times above. 10 teams (1/3 of the league) had over 107 point for the entire seasnon last year. If 1/3 of the league can do it for the entire year, a good team should be able to do that for less than a season. 8 teams had 110 points over the entire year. So I decided to look a bit more into it...lets look at 110 points: -8 teams did that over the entire year, of the team that did not make 110 points.. -St. Louis played at a 110 point pace over the first half of theseason. -Boston played at a 113 point pace from Jan 1 through the end of the year (more than half the season) -Edmonton played at a 114 point pace the 2nd half of the season -Pittsburgh played at a 114 point pace the 1st half of the season -Los Angeles almost made it (108 points) in the 2nd half of the season I didn't bother to look into any other teams, but if you really looked into the stats, it looks like half the league either got 110 points in an entire season, or had periods of half the season (or more than half the season) where they were on a 110 point pace. So not only does it happen it is acutually pretty common.

I don't want to start an unrelated war with the comments I'm about to make but here goes: I know a few people that I talk to about the Sabres that say similar things. Root for Eichel (almost more than the Sabres), think the Risto trade was bad...The team got fleeced in the ROR/Tage trade no matter what happens going forward, the team will never win because they are soft...need players like Ramsey, Shoenfeld, Korab (because they were REAL players) etc, etc. All of them have a couple things in common....they are all over 55 years old, they all will die on the hill that in EVERY sport Defense wins championships all the time, and if anyone scores more than 1 goal in a game against you or throws more than 2 td passes against you the only solution is to hit them hard over and over and over to 'teach them a lesson'.

I like to think you are never 'out of it' until you can't 'get back in it. Seriously, it is slightly annoying when an NFL team is down something like 27-13 in the 3rd quarter...then they score a TD and the announcers always say "they are back in it!" Again, you aren't out of it until you can't even get close to being 'back in it'. With the Sabres, I really think it is a matter of small steps. I mentioned earlier, there are 10 games left in December. Get 13-14 points in the next 10. Is that acheivable? Sure is. At that point you probably find yourself only 3-5 points (give or take a point) out of the last wildcard with more than half the season left. Not only not out of it, but at that point 'right in the thick' of it.

I'd still keep Olofsson. Until there is a clear replacement on the roster, and that young replacement is proven, I'll keep a very streaky but very good PP guy around. I currently think his current goal-less streak is more a factor of how bad his line overall is playing. He isnt not a great 2 way player, but again, unless I'm getting a useful player or a 1st rounder back I keep him until some young guy forces him out. I agree with that.

I'm good with Mitts playing out this year and then MAYBE even next year...unless the Sabres staff (who knows a lot more than any of us here) see he has plateaued or even regressed in aspects of his game we can't see. HOWEVER, something has to change with him, especially even strength. Its both the stats and the eye test, the line he is on seems to be really, really struggling the past few weeks. I generally support Mitts more than many on this board.....but in the last 5 games...no goals, no assists and a -7 is not acceptable in any way. In the 10 games previous to that (when the Sabres were going through injuries on the back end), he had 4 goals and 6 points in 10 games. What happened in the last couple weeks (5 games) where you go from scoring almost every other game to being invisible in every way?

On a somewhat related note, I do like how Granato is honest about stuff like this. After having a bunch of injuries, most coaches need to be asked about them, and they do the usual 'coach talk' by saying things like "they aren't an excuse" or "everyone gets them" or "next man up" But I heard a Granato interview the other day and he was asked what is the key to the team playing better and he came right out and said the D-unit being healthy.

Unless this was the early 1990's. Dave Andreychuck had 99 points that season and was 22nd in the league in scoring. The goaltending was so bad back then, you have to wonder just how many goals Ovi would have now if he played in that Era. But back to Tage, agree SO FAR this year he is playing like a superstar. The pure number of points is impressive, but to me the fact he ranks in the top 5 in both points and goals right now seals it. 100 would be that nice round number to acheive. Now just keep it up so it becomes a reality, not just 'on pace' for it.

You could say a 6-2 win over a streaking St. Louis team at the time was easier than it should be. Anyone can nit-pick any games, the whole point I was making was about their schedule in general. Every team beats great teams and loses to bad teams. Arizone is currently the 4th or 5th worst team in the league in terms of points, they are a -26 in terms of goal differential (Buffalo is a plus 9), and If I remember that game featured a Sabres team that was a lot less healthy than they are now (Clague and Pilut were at 15 minutes or more if ice time, lybushkin played but he was hurt, No Jokiharju and no Samuelsson). If we have to classify the upcoming Arizona game, I would put it for sure closer to the 'easier' category rather than the 'harder' one.

They could be, won't rule it out. A good test will be the rest of the month. They are mostly healthy now. a 103 point team when they are healthy should be able to put some stretches together where they beat very good teams. Can they get at least 13-14 points by the end of December, maybe a couple more? That will give us a good idea. They have a good balanced schedule coming up...tough games at (a hurting) Colorado, Vegas, and Boston, home to Tampa. Then some 'easier' games with Columbus and Arizona, and some 'decent' games against Pitt (twice) the Kings, and Detroit. It would be hard to get a 10 game stretch that is so balanced. If they can get 13 or 14 out of the next 20 points by the end of December, that puts them at 38 or 39 points in 36 games, probably putting them within 4 or 5 of the last wild card slot...then 'game on' for the rest of the year.

Sportsline (formerly the old CBS sports website) I have found strangely pretty accurate in their long term predictions. For example, in the last few seasons when the Sabres had their 'hot starts', they never had them as a legit team and predicted them to fade as the season went on....and the Bills they have been pretty good the past 3-4 years in their early season predictions as far as how many wins they would have by the end. I have no idea what their methodology is...no idea if they simply get their analytics from other places though. https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/standings/ With that said, right now they have the Sabres with a 48.1% chance of making the playoffs. Detroit is 6 points ahead of the Sabres in the standings but they have Detroit at only 13.9%. They do not have the Sabres in the top 3 in the division though, they currently have their chances with only a wildcard. They do have San Jose as the worst team in the league right now...and they project Vegas to win the presidents trophy in a close battle with Boston, Toronto, and Florida climbing back into the fight according to their statistical models.

I had a similar experience. I'm sure they talked about the Sabres at some time, but I had to go to the office this morning...got in the car and turned on WGR. Did the update and mentioned the Sabres, but when they started talking they talked about the Bills and Von Miller again. Got out of the car and back in....they were talking something about the 'los angeles raiders' and how ice cube is a big fan? Not sure I changed it pretty quickly. After my last stop I got back in, and they had a guest on talking about football again. So maybe I just missed the Sabres segments, but you would think after the night Tage had, All three of the random times I tuned it wouldn't be the same story about the bills we have heard for a couple days now and then some random segement about who-knows-what concerning the NFL. I have said this over and over the last few months....The Bills are better and obviously are a bigger story becasue of their national attention, but in terms of topics to talk about and how much FUN the games can be week to week, the Sabres might be a better talking point. Just apparently because of the success of the Bills more people want to talk about them, but the Sabres to me are a LOT more interesting. I visit both message boards and this year I have had a lot more things to say about the Sabres than the Bills, a lot more fun reading other posts, and even a lot more arguments (which aren't always bad) here than I have at the Bills board.

I don't mind Dunlevy. It took a few games (months) to get used to him. He isn't great but he's fine to me. A disgrace? I have no idea how anyone can say he is a disgrace. he has gotten a little better on the radio with letting you know the Sabres score, and the rest of the time he tells me what is going on and doesn't make many mistakes. I don't need/want much more 'personality' from my play by play guy. Ray...eh, hes ok. Nothing great but I can deal with him.

I'm up in Niagara county so I sometimes will pick up 590 out of Toronto. In Erie county it is hit-or-miss whether it can be picked up but they do a good job with Hockey. Most of their shows of course lean toward the Leafs, but they touch on the rest of the league quite a bit. 3-5pm....Kyper and Bourne is the show...is probably the one that is best with Hockey...again a lot of Leafs stuff, but they frequently talk, and sometimes have had interviews with people from other cities around the league. I usually start on WGR, but often if I'm in the car then I'll switch over to 590. And even when they do focus on the Leafs, who I do not like, I find it more interesting to listen to than the WGR afternoon show. 590 talks about the teams, the games. They talk about hockey issues...much better than listening to Schopp go on and on about his fantasy teams and bets he places....I hate that so much, its a sports talk show, can you at least stick to the actual games and teams MOST Of the time?

I agree with you. To me the Sabres have better stories...there is more growth/development...more material to talk about. With the Bills, its kinda the same thing over and over and over. I drive a lot for work (on the days I'm not home) and sometimes turn off WGR for 2 reasons: 1.) When the aftenoon show doesn't talk sports but talks gambling too much, about their personal lives, a friend they haven't seen in a while, the crazy number of fantasy teams they are in (much of which they do in the morning but in the AM they get to sports quicker) or 2.) When I have had enough of the same Bills talk over and over and over saying nothing really new but repeating it anyway. Not much shows this better than whey they interview the head coaches. I like McDermott as a coach, but he is Billicheck-lite...he answers every question without really answering it, bordering on the arrogant 'we'll keep this in-house' on most things. Granato I don't want to miss...he is much more open, talks honestly (at least in the postive) ways about his players, and often times says stuff that the typical casual fan never thinks about. Just for me, a lo more to the Sabres talk than the Bills talk.

They shoulda/coulda done it last year without him (13 seconds and a home game vs cincy away), so maybe this year? And last year was without Tre at CB, he'll be back. With that said, it is harder now. Part of the reason I am actually enjoying the Sabres season so far more than the Bills is the angst that is on the Bills side of things among many fans because of stuff like this. With the Sabres, there are lower expectations. If they lose oh well, if they win or score a lot of goals, wow, that was fun! However, with the Bills, every loss, every major injury seems to be met by a lot of doom/gloom/angst because anything short of a Superbowl is a bad season for this team. The Bills are a lot closer to the ultimate prize....Just not as much fun on a weekly basis.

That line has been great, no doubth about it. However, is there any data available as to what D-men are on the ice the most with them? I'm just curious to see the charts if they were available, to see if there is any difference in how they perform with different D-pairings. Often times we may give too much credit, or too much blame, to a particular line when their performance may be more of a function of what 5 player unit is on the ice, as opposed to a 3 player unit.

Sabres are 5th worst in the league overall in goals allowed per game played. Injuries to D-men had a lot to do with that, the fact they got hit so hard at that position all at once. BUT, injuries are part of the game, other teams have dealt with that concentration of injuries to the D-unit almost as bad as the Sabres. -They are 10th worst in shots per game played. -They are 8th worse in Save percentage. Obviously both of those are issues that need to be improved on. -They are 6th worse in Penalty killing. Get better on the PK, the above numbers also probably get a bit better. Its not that they are short handed a lot either....they are middle of the pack in terms of total time short handed. As far as goaltending, Comrie and UPL are a big part of it with their performance so far. Anderson has a .916 save percentage. Comrie/UPL combined have more games played than Anderon, but their combined Save percentage is .879. Median in the league is .905 now, so if you want to be even average/median, the UPL/Comrie duo is 26 points behind that. Finally, plus-minus is not a perfect stat, but it is useful to see where/when you are allowing goals vs scoring them: -Among forwards, Mitts, Olofsson, and Krebs are a combined -24. No one else among all the forwards is worse than a -2.....and nine other guys are even or positive. -Among D-men, Power, Dahling, Jokiharju, and Samuelsson are all positive, a combined +28. Lybushkin is even. However, Pilut, Clague, Fitz, and Bryson are all negative and a combined -22. So, what is the low hanging fruit to get this team to allow less goals? Not needing to give too many minutes to anyone outside of the top 5 d-men....Olofsson, Krebs, and Mitts being better....Comrie/UPL upping their games.... and be better on the PK. Advanced stats guys can dig deeper into it, but those 4 things are the glaring reasons.

If It wasn't you, and it was someone else who entered the conversation, I apologize.

Ok, I browsed your 'wall or words' but at this point I'm not going to respond to every single bit of it because it is just too much. You were wrong to make the comments you did to me. Period. End of story. I think what you are missing is the whole POINT of my post. I cited examples of where Cozens cost the Sabres goals. I have done the same with Peterka and Quinn. My point is, and all examples I listed were in support of that main point that I will restate here (hopefully in a way easier to understand) again: COZENS IS A VERY GOOD PLAYER THAT HAS A MAJOR FLAW IN HIS GAME THAT IF HE FIXES HE WILL BE THAT MUCH BETTER. What the heck you are arguing about and telling me that I am just wrong about....It must be an ego thing with you. The points I brought up are NOT wrong. I see how you ignored the point where I said that I HAVE pointed out where he cost the sabres goals. In NO WAY did I say he does not make good defensive plays, nor did I say he is a bad defensive player. What I did say (that you seem like you REALLY want to ignore) is that if he corrects ONE part of his game (being out of position too often in the defensive end) he can be even BETTER than he is now. You must like arguing, or you must not like admitting when you are wrong...or you must be someone who just is dead set on picking out part of someones post that you can puff out your chest and dispute it out of context to make yourself feel better. Whatver the case is....the points above you brough up may be correct, but where you are wrong, you are DEAD wrong is when you made the comment to me "what are you smoking" or in the post after that told me that my point was wrong.

I agree with you on the last part. Personally, i LIKE analytics. I do not love analytics though. Not to single anyone out, but I have seen too many times (for my liking) on this site someone post a chart that has more blue on it than red on it...and basically say 'there, this proves that player 'X' or line 'X' is good or bad...case closed." In my opinion, analyitics alone are about as useless as someone saying 'he's playing good, look how fast he is skating into the corner.' Without knowledge of what a player, or line is assigned to do, what the coaches are telling them to do....analytics are PART of the puzzle but like most statistics they can be misinterpreted. As the old saying goes....there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Analytics are not junk, they are useful. But in the hands of some people, they are often just cherry-picked to bolster a weak argument or incorrect belief they have about a player/line/team.

Becuase there are a lot of variables in there. First, it is a big 'if' they win the next 3. It is possible, but from a pure statisticaly point of view, the odds of them getting 6 points in the next 3 games are less than 20% (purely statistcal). Then even if they do that, you are also talking about all the other teams that are fighting for the wild card that are ahead of the Sabres...You would still be behind or tied with the Islanders, Tampa, Rangers...providing they lost all their games...and you have to jump over Florida, Montreal, and Washington too. So even if the Sabres win the next 3, a big if...they are still be behind Pittsburgh...and likely behind 3-6 other teams for the wildcard. The teams above them in the next 5 days will not lose all their games because some of them are playing each other, guaranteeing that some of them will get at least some points. The finish line is what you need to look at. 95-96 points is genrally what you need to make the playoffs (sometimes a few more, sometimes a few less) but get to a 95 point pace and then worry about the specifics in the last couple weeks of the year. Right now the Sabres are on about a 75 point pace. To get to 95 points, they have to start playing like a 104 point team the rest of the way. Personally, I think this team has the potential to play as a 95-100 point team the rest of the way. It requires no major injuries and continued development, but I want to hope for that. However, even if they do that, that only gets them to the 89-92 point total for the season.