mjd1001

Better in which way? How do you define what/who is a better hockey player? Do you value a 2-way guy who is very valuable across all 200 feet and can win you a lot of faceoffs? Who is going to give you no less than 15 goals a year? Who has never hit 30 in his career but averages more than 20? Then ROR is better than Tage to you.. Do you value a forward that might give you 40+ goals in a season and already has given you 30+? A guy that has the potential, a ceiling, to double the 'average' goal output of the other guy, and is just entering the prime of his career, where ROR is going into his 14th season next year and likely past his peak? Then Tage is better than ROR for you.

I could go pretty deep into this.... There are a lot of players in many sports who have 'more talent' and at one point are 'projected' to be better players, but it just doesn't work out. A lot of pre-draft hype is based on skating speed, how hard your shot is, and how well you can dominate teenage competition that will never get to the NHL level. The Scouts are good at digging deeper than just that, but they aren't always right. We have to get the word "generational" out of our minds when we discuss Eichel, and just look at the production he gives in the NHL and not a projection of what was fed to us when he was a teenager himself. Could Jack have a career path that is 'good' to 'very good' without ever maintaining superstar status? Is it possible he ends up being a 'top 30' forward in the nhl (meaning 25-35) instead of a top 5 guy ever? Lets give it another year in Vegas where he had more time 'to heal', but that is a possibility. And if that IS a possibility, is it also possible that Tage can achieve that same level? I think it is. So to respond to the topic...it is NOT outrageous to ask the question because the answer might be different than what a lot of people believe now. Many 'think' Eiche is more talented than Tage because we were told he was 7 years ago, and because we think he is a faster skater (we can see that with our own eyes). But maybe hockey talent favors Tage's reach, his size, his shot accuracy.....maybe Tage's 'hockey sense' and 'vision' have developed over the last few years better than Jacks. Maybe those things that actually are ways to measure 'talent' have swung in Tage's favor. If, IF, Tage is 'more talented' than Eichel in his shot accuracy, release, height/reach, ability to read a play and know when too shoot....are we just to default to saying Eichel is more talented because his shot is almost as good AND he skates faster and we were told he was more talented years ago? Is it possible Jack could have come out of the draft viewed as 'almost generational', had his 'career' year a few years into his career (still only being about 10th in scoring that year), and for the rest of his career be a very good/star player without even coming close to his pre-draft hype? Maybe. Maybe not. It is a possibility. Despite all his talent, Jack may be a 30-35 goal-per-year guy who tops out at about 40 in his best years. -Is it possible that Tage at center develops into a player that is more productive than that? Its possible and the question is fair to ask (but must be backed up with more than 1 great season to ensure this just isn't his 'career' year) Other examples where this happened and people were SURE the player in question was greater than they ended up being: -Sammy Watkins. When drafted was the obvious best/most talented WR in that draft by a lot, and through the first couple years of his career he held that opinion by many. However, as the years went by, it was clear he wasn't going to live up to the 'hype' of his talent and the quick snapshot of his early career success. -I can think back to Taylor Hall when he was drafted. Not quite considered 'generational', but for sure considered better than a typical first overall pick with Superstar status attached to him. He had one MVP year in his career year...beyond that, hasn't lived up to the hype. -Ryan Nugent Hopkins. He came from a great draft class, but it wasn't a suprise he went first overall, he was the 'best' talent, far better than the players selected after him....Landeskog, Huberdeau, Zibanejad, Scheifle. Does that make Hopkins a Bust? No, hes a very good player, just it took a few years for people to realize despite his 'pure talent' and 'pre draft hype', he was just that...good to very good, not a superstar. There are many, many other examples of course. We will probably have our answer in the next 12 months. Can Eichel make the jump to be a consistent top 5 scorer in this league and carry a team on his back into and through the playoffs? Or is he just what we have seen so far...a guy who you rely on for 30 goals per year...who can top out in the low 40s and maybe, MAYBE in one of his career years crack the top 10 in scoring?

If Sam would have elected to stay in Buffalo, he likely would have retained his position as a Center that Granato put him in last year. With Reinhart as a Center, would Thompson ever been given the chance to play center then? Sam isn't here and he didn't want to be, but IF the Sabres had convinced him to stay with a big enough deal, you may not have the Tage you have now playing center..you may instead have a 15 goal-per-year Tage playing on the wing where he never seemed to excel.

Oakville, ON kid....when he does play for the Amerks, family/friends will be able to take just a 2.5 hour drive to see him play. Only about an hour from Buffalo too.

You may be right, but discussion like this is a large part of what being a fan is...and being a member of a message boards of fans is about.

The comparison to ROR is the key with Thompson. The Sabres may end up with that being a trade that benefits them greatly, even though St. Louis would not take it back. The Blues got their cup out of it...The Sabres got a guy who may be the 'better player/better fit' but one that took time to get there. The trade may be good for both teams simply because St. Louis didn't have time to wait if they were in their 'cup window' and the Sabres weren't even making the playoffs with or without any of those players during that time. As far as Tage vs Jack....If you took Eichel off of Vegas for his time this year and you put Thompson on the Knights...would Vegas be any better right now with Thompson on that team?

Until recently, I haven't really looked into his struggles: -He has played 4 seasons now (although only a handful of games in the first 2 seasons) and his career GAA is 2.84 and Save percentage .908 -Every year of his career, Petersen's save % has gotten lower. As mentioned, this year he is at .895 with a pretty big sample size. -For comparison sake, Linus Ulmark has career numbers of 2.73 and .912. Most of that behind a pretty bad NHL D-unit. -In VERY limited time, UPL is 2.74 and .917 this year and 3.08 .913 for his career. Here is the big thing...Petersen singed that new contract with the Kings, 3 more years at $5 per year. Things can turn around for any player, especially a goalie, but it might not be the worst thing in the world that the Sabres lost Petersen to the Kings.

I don't think there are many coaches who would NOT want Eichel on their team. He is very very talented. The question is how much of your cap space does a guy like Eichel command? The issue is do you want him eating up 12.5% of your cap? Hes really good, but hes not 'carry the team on his back to the playoffs good'. For 12.5% of the cap I want more than very good, more than a 30-35 goal, 50 assist guy who doesn't seem to want to do the tough things needed as a leader.

Lots of different site out there that use different formulas to determine playoff odds/percentages. Some are as simple as looking at strict probabilities based on each team having a 50% chance of winning each game. Others take it a step further and look at a teams winning percentage vs opponents. Even others use formulas so complicated that use various advanced stats, roster compositions, injuries, etc. I look at 4 or 5 different sites for playoff odds...they all have vegas in the 34%-43% chance right now.

Numbers and projections can be a tricky thing. Lets say Quinn adds 20. That isn't a 'pure 20', you have to think who he is replacing. Suppose he 'replaces' a player that scored 5 or 8....that is a net positive 12? Not really. The ice time he needs to get to that 20 is going to be more than the player he likely replaces. Suppose he gets 5 more minutes per game than the player he 'replaces'. Well those 5 minutes have to come off of someone else. Lets say you have to take 5 minutes away from a player/players who score at a 12-15 goal pace. Those 20 goals are great and needed, but you can't just add them to the bottom line without seeing what you are taking out of the lineup or who gets reduced ice time. Maybe some of Quinns 20 goal (maybe 25 goal) ice time is PP time, and that takes away from ice time on the PP for Okposo or Olofsson? As said above to make the playoffs you likely need to both reduce goals allowed and increase goals scored. Hopefully the Sabres CAN land a better goaltender which helps by 10 goals or more per season of that alone..and the young D-corps getting better and being able to move the puck out of the zone quicker reduces another 10-15 goals off that total (and maybe LEADS to a few more goals scored across the entire forward group simply due to more ice time in the offensive zone.)

If my math is correct, they have 91 goals in 30 games since the all star break. 3.03....better but still about 20-25 goals off (over an 82 game season) off of that 3.3 goal pace.

This team is averaging 2.77 goals per game. To just get into the top 10 in goals you need 3.3 per game this year. Yes, goaltending is going to be an issue next year, but team has to find a way to generate 40 or more goals per year than they have now in addition to getting better goaltending. Average-to-above average Goaltending alone doesn't get this team to the playoffs. You can hope, but I'm not sure you can expect more goals from Thompson/Skinner/Okposo. So where does that leave you? Olofsson (if he is back) plays a full year healthy and gets you another 5 or 8 than this year. Cozens/Tuch/Krebs/Quinn/Mitts...IF they all are here and play a full season, does that get you that many extra goals? You have to hope a lot of players end up producing more, no one has a bad year, and there are no injuries to key pieces. As much as I want this team to get a younger/better/more consistent goaltender, I need to see more scoring also.

The thing about Dahlin is...he is 21 (think he turns 22 tomorrow?) D-men usually take a little longer to develop...he might still be getting better and rounding out his complete game for a few years yet.

UPL in Buffalo, a free agent guy in Buffalo. As far as Rochester....I don't have any names but the Sabres have to be looking for some 'decent' young prospects that other teams have. You don't want to overpay for another teams top goaltending prospect, but I would think there are guys out there that are 'potential' NHL long term guys, in their early 20's, that might not have a path to the NHL with their current team. Adams has to find a handful of those guys and maybe trade a mid-round pick for them. After you find one of those, sign another free-agent for Rochester to go with him. Or find a college free agent guy that hasn't been drafted for Roch.

I agree that this D-unit is not playoff caliber yet. Getting a legit top 4 guy (probably 2 of them) to plug in would help them next year if they really really want to make the playoffs. However, It think you don't need that on this unit. Dahlin is legit #1 guy now and he should be playing 24+ minutes per game next year. The issue is Power. I don't think he will be a top 2 caliber guy next year, it might take a few years. But you bring in a legit top 2 or top 4 guy, and that likely takes minutes away from Power. Do you want to bring in a couple of really good D-men next year to help you make the playoffs IF the tradeoff is Power gets less ice time because of it?

Many of us were OK with the Eichel trade (as much as we could be) because, even though it was hard, we came to the realization Eichel was not as good as we wanted him to be. McDavid is the best offense producer in the NHL. Matthews is in the top 5. Eichel...we WANTED him to be '1a' to McDavid and as good as Matthews, but in reality, he is more in the range of the 20th best in the NHL rather than top 5 in producing offense. Eichel is in a category closer to Scheifele, Aho, and an aging John Tavares....well behind the likes of McDavid, Matthews, and McKinnon.

People who can't be on time. It seems like most people I know are always running late. Have dinner reservations? we are getting there barely on time. Appt for anything? plan on being late. Meeting me for lunch or dinner? I can expect to be waiting 15-20 minutes for them. Say they will call me back in '10 minutes'? count on an hour. When I make plans with someone else, I am making a commitment to them so I honor it. If something else comes up after I give someone a time, that 'something else' is the 2nd priority. I understand everyone is busy, so If i tell someone I will do something at a certain time, I know they might be changing other things on their schedule to fit me in, I expect them to do the same. I get it that emergencies come up, that everyone cannot be 100% on time. But I know a lot of people, friends and family members included, that are LITERALLY late for 19 out of every 20 things they commit to. On a somewhat related note, how about doctor office visits now that they will cancel your appointment or sometimes even charge you money if you are late (they view it as a canceled appointment if you aren't on time).....but when you are on time there is nothing preventing them from making you wait an hour past your appt time to get in. If you are going to charge ME if I'm late or I cancel in the last day, then you should do the same thing to me if you call me and cancel my appt at the last minute or If I do get there on time and you make me wait an hour or more.

The key for many of us has been to look at who he is, look at his total time with the Sabres. What he did the first month of the season should not matter anymore than what he did during his scoreless streak, as much as what he has done in his last 17 games. I don't want to define a player by his 'streaks'. To me he is a guy that is a 20-25 goal scorer, with the potential to hit 30, and can be VERY dangerous on the PP. People like to say he is a PP specialist so those goals don't mean as much, but I say back...tell me that when you are a playoff team and struggling to win games BECAUSE your PP is sputtering. A goal is a goal is a goal (unless it is an empty net goal, but again maybe that is still as valuable because it clinches a win.) I have wanted him back on this team consistently over the past year or so..as long as he isn't getting drastically overpaid long term. (overpay him on a 3-4 year deal and I'm fine with it, they should have cap room for at least that long)

I'm not into any april fools stuff at all, but if you want to do something cute like a prank I get it. Reporting 'news' on a forum however is not funny, just annoying.

I did a quick search online and found nothing about this either. If someone is reporting something that a lot of us are talking about as major news, can you please put a link to a legit story before reporting it?

That may be the point of not having a superstar forward. You don't need one, you just need one or two of your 'star' forwards to play like 'superstars' for a year. Just about every player has a career year or two. Any one of the Sabres top guys having a career year might be good enough to label it 'playing like a superstar' for a year or two.

Like most things it isn't all one thing, but a combination of things. -Timing/luck. Every team, including this Sabres team and previous Sabres teams, has hot streaks and cold streaks. They are currently in a warm/hot streak. -Dahlin. He is playing like a top 20 D-man right now. He may be personally responsible for moving the puck out of the Sabres own end 10 times a game were a replacement level player wouldn't. -Getting injuried players back.

Yes, they can. If you have a superstar D-man....not just a point producer but a guy who can control every aspect of the game when he is on the ice (play good D, move the puck out of your zone, contribute some offense), that can be just as valuable as a superstar forward. Maybe more so, because that D-man can be on the ice for 4-6 minutes more than a top forward. If, IF the Sabres have Dahlin turn into that kind of player...and if Owen power eventually turns into that....virtually the entire game the team would have a D-man on the ice that would control the entire back end. I know it hasn't happened often in the NHL, but I think that can be just as effective of a way to build a team than trying to chase that superstar forward.

I don't think so. Maybe, MAYBE him not being here let Dahlin step into more of a leadership role. Not even sure that is true but its possible. More so, I just think most D-men need time to develop and adjust. A few years usually. Dahlin is just on the same development curve he would have pretty much been on had Eichel been here or not.

I'm not sure what I think of the wild. In a way, its really great because there is so much going on with it...the whole logo is the head of a bear..the mouth is a lake or river, the star for the eye, the trees, a lot of thought and work went into it. But that may be the problem, there is SO much in there that unless you really stop and look at it really closely, you miss most of the details.