mjd1001

Now that we are almost a month into the Season, I was thinking of some things that are really surprising me around the NHL: -Boston. I thought they were going to fall off the cliff. I truly thought they would be a below .500 team the entire year. It is early, but they are playing pretty well since the first week. -Crosby. I still figured on him being a point-a-game guy or slightly more with Kessel, but him only getting 1 goal through 10 games is a little surprising. Interesting fact: in the last calendar year (Oct 30 2014, to Oct 30, 2015), Crosby has played in 78 games and has 22 total goals. -Toronto. I thought they would be pretty bad, but not 1 win in the first month bad. -Calgary. A drop off from last year? I didn't even think that with the young guys they have and them getting better. They can still turn it around, but they look like a different team. -Jamie Benn. Hard to say the guy who led the league in points last year is a surprise...but I thought last year was his career year. Hes starting out even better than last year. -Fighting. Last year was the lowest number of fights in the NHL (per game) since the late 1960s (last year had less than half what we saw even in the early 2000s) and this year so far it is even much lower than last year. Go back into the 1990's and the Sabres had close to (or above) 100 fights a year. In 2003-2004 they had 68. Through most of the last 5 years, they had 30-40 per year. This year, they are on a pace for about 15. As long as the hockey is good though, I don't really miss the fights. Anything else that I missed, or that really stands out to anyone as a surprise though the first month?

Normally, I am not one to care much about 'journalists'. Sure, I like some better than others, but I don't get too wound up about most of them or their opinion. The Patriots guys are a too much for me sometime, but I can even put up with Rodney Harrison in small doses, no problem. There have been 2 recent excpetions to this for me. Cris Carter. After what he said at the rookie symposium, how does this guy still have a job? That is disgracefull. And Steven A. Smith. I don't know exactly why it is, but I can't watch him at all. He annoys me, his talking points annoy me, his voice annoys me. When I see him on TV now, I don't CARE what the topic is, change the channel to anything as quickly as possible.

I'm not for trading for him at all, for any reasonable offer. Stamkos is a win-now type of guy. Sure, he is good enough he will be one of those players who is still good when he is 30, 31....but you are going to be paying money (in a cap world) for the 26-27 year old Stamkos when he is 31. I don't want to give up any legit prospects who will be a better bargain in 3-5 year from now (when this TEAM is supposed to be hitting its 'multi-year' peak). Unless the Sabres got a truly remarkable deal from Tampa, and unless he ALSO was willing to sign a deal for less than $8 a year...I don't really want him on this team.

The difference beween a Great GM/front office and all the others....deciding NOW to sell off an aging roster. Bostons rebuild could have been quicker and not as deep had they decided to trade some of these parts last year. Very few teams are able to do that, but the ones that do are usually rewarded for doing it early, not later. Not only do you put off the day when you finally 'turn the corner' buy an extra year or two...but they would have gotten a lot more for those assets last year.

I have no idea what to make of Bogosian. When I see him play, sometimes he looks like a tough-guy type, clear the goal out D-man who doesn't make mistakes, then the next shift he is turning it over. When I hear people who know more hockey than me talk about him...I hear he can be (or already is) a legit top 2 d-man who is destined for all-star games...and other say he will 'fit in nicely' as a pretty reliabe 3-4 D-man as long as you don't give him too many minutes. Some I hear talk about him like he is going to be the second coming of Chris Pronger...others seem to say he is 1/2 step better than Mike Weber. I really have no idea what to think of him.

I'd like to think the Sabres will be better than 4th worse, and I think they will. However, except for Toronto, I can make a good case for any team above them on that list to stay above them. I cannot say how far Boston will fall, but I really expect them to tumble the most points compared to last year though.

I took in a little bit of camp yesterday, and most of the sessions this morning (and the Scrimmage). Things are early,but I thought I'd put out some observations. Take this with the appropriate size grain of salt, as not only am I a casual observer, I never even played organized hockey (so I have no idea how to look at footwork, positioning, etc) but here is what stood out to me: -Moulson looked like the best player out there handling the puck. Great hands is how I'd characterize it. Great at handling in traffic and picking up loose pucks/bad passes. -Franson is big. At one point he was standing next to Girgensons and looked like he towered over him. Foligno looks bigger than last year. I know he is the same height, just looked a lot bigger than most guys out there. -Girgensons looked like the best player overall out there. From speed, playmaking, always being around the puck, etc....to the casual observer who never saw this team, he would look like the teams best player. -Eichel looked timid. He really didn't stand out much in drills or the scrimmage to me. Also, between plays when his linemates Moulson and Girgensons would be talking, he seemed to often just skate by himself with his head down and not really talk or interact with the other players (as much). It is only camp and VERY early, but to me it seems like it might be a little early to be expecting him to dominate some games this year and even put up 20 goals. -Guhle looked like he was one of the best skaters out there. Fast, can handle the puck, carrying the puck. He stood out early as a guy who can be a premier puck-carrying D-man if he develops, and doesn't look TOO far away. -Kaletta looked better than I thought, but he seems to over-skate things. Its like once he decides to start skating hard, he often goes past the puck or the player he is chasing. -Leduc, for a young guy, also looked good carrying the puck. Not as fast as Guehle, but when he had the puck on his stick, he looked like someone who can avoid an opposing player trying to get the puck from him. Good skater and very good hands. -Gionta talks a lot. Talking to teamates between drills, during drills. Talking to them before and after whistles in the scrimmage. Talking almost non-stop on the bench. Gionta is also like Kaletta in that he skates really hard and looks like he is putting out a lot of effort...just he doesn't seem to 'overskate' the play as much as Kaletta does. Once again, its early, but the last 2 days might be the only 2 days I get a chance to attend camp...and those are the things that stood out to me. I'd be interested in anyone else having impressions of what they are seeing so far.

Would I have liked to have not given up a first and given a 2nd or 3rd? or course, if for no other reason that first (or prospect that comes with it) could be used in a different deal. However, i'm fine with it. If this is the guy Murray wants...and he turns out to be a good starter...then it is well worth a 1st round pick in that position that more often than not doesn't turn into a great asset down the line. If he is who you want...and you aren't getting him unless you give a first..then you give that first. You don't not do the trade on principle.

The hardest part of this season for me may be dealing with some of the fans, talk radio and the message boards. If, IF they do still miss the playoffs, I'm going to have a hard time getting through the posts and the callers who are going to say "Fire Murray, he's an Idiot" or "Eichel and/or Reinhart are busts" or even "Same old Sabres"..........when in all honesty if they do miss the playoffs, even by a lot, I think that is part of what can be expected.

I was talking to a friend about this last night...so how are the Sabres going to do? That is the problem I am having. We have opinions on sports. That is a large part of the reason we watch. In the past, I had the opinion coming out of the early 2000's lockout that the Sabres would be a playoff team...I was laughed at but I was right. In the immediate post Brierre and Drury years, I thought the team would be really good and a top 5 conference team, and I was really wrong. But, that is what we do, we form strong opinions. HOWEVER, I have no feeling for this current team, ZERO. Maybe that is a good thing, to just sit back and relax and watch. -If told me this team was going to finish 26th or 27th in the league this year and draft in the top 5, it wouldn't surprise me. If Reinhart and Eichel aren't really ready, and combine to score 15-20 goals, and they have a problem in net....I wouldn't be happy but I'd almost expect it. -If you told me the team was going to be competitive most nights, battle for 8th in the conference for most of the year but fall back late in the season and finish 9th, 10th, or 11th.....again, I wouldn't be surpised at all. -Finally, If you tell me this team will be one of the top 10 teams in the league, battling for the #4 spot in the conference...with Eichel or Reinhart having a short at Rookie of the Year and Kane scoring 30+ and O'Rielly having an all-star year....I would not argue with that either. So what is my point? For the first time ever, I have no way to have strong feelings on this team. I think it is just as likely they are a 70 point team or a 100 point team or anywhere in between.

I think Chara has his days as an elite D-man being over. This year, barring injury, he will still be 'above average', but the overall quality you will get out of him will be that of a typical #2 or #3 guy. He may be in great shape, but there is no way all of those minutes aren't taking a big toll on a guy his age. If the Bruins get into the playoffs this year, I think it will be because of the veterans staying healthy and producing at a 'decent' level, but they will need some unexpected production from some of their younger guys (but they don't really have any younger guys with a huge upside that I can tell) Pastrnak? Maybe, but for the Bruins to contend for a title..or even make the playoffs, they better get 20-25 goals from him at least.

I go back and forth on whether I'd want him on this team..at any price. He is slow, I don't think he can be a guy who is an 'everday d-man' without being a liability. And, I would rather have the ice time given to someone else who is not like that. On the other hand, as a 'low minute', #5 or #6 guy who gets extra minutes on the powerplay, I'm ok with him in that role if only for 2 years. But then again, if you are going to play his as a #5 or #6 guy....is he going to accept a contract that justifies that lack of icetime?

If Kane is healthy the entire year, i'd be hoping for 30 goals. That might be tough, but 30 is the number that if he gets there, I'd be very happy.

I ran the udpate and am on Windows 10...no problems so far.

I never even knew there was a US hockey hall of fame until this article.

Article by Adam Gretz...saying it is obvious Crosby is the best in the game still, but who is next? Full article here: http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/25257993/sidney-crosby-is-still-the-nhls-best-player-but-who-is-next-in-line Just a note for anyone who doesn't follow Gretz...I think he is a pretty good writer with some good ideas...but he seems to overate players who are Canadian and anyone that plays for Pittsburgh (if you look back through his old articles on the internet, I found some from as far back as 2011 and 2012 that have Crosby and Malkin and #1 and #2 or #3...while Ovechkin is rarely higher than 4th or 5th...and just about every March or April he has an article about how the Penguins are 'rounding into shape' for the playoffs, or are underated defensivley...or are clearly the team to beat.) As for his top 5 choices...I think I'd have Stamkos #1, not #3, and I wouldn't have Price on that list.

A pretty simple look at what to expect from Matt Moulson this year in terms of goals: -Historically, a 'goal scorer' has one thing that doesn't change too much as they get older, especially if they are still in their early 30's..and that usually is shooting percentage. Moulsons career shooting percentage is right about 13% (even after last years awful 8.3. The year before that, even when he split time between the Isles, Sabres, and Minnesota, he was at 13.1. He had a couple years as high as the mid 16s, and only one other year below 10..and that was 9.7. So, being conservative, I think a number of 12.5% should be a reasonable goal. -The second part of that is shots. This is where players lose more as they get older. Moulson, however, is a player that doesn't rely as much on speed or puck carrying, so logic would dictate his drop-off won't be as severe (kinda like Dave Andreychuk.) So, how many shots can you expect from him over an 82 game season? The full season he split between Buf, NYI and Min he averaged 2.35 per game. His 4 year aveage per game (including last year) is 2.51 per game. His career average is 2.51. With better linemates, hopefully a D-core to get the puck out of Sabres end quicker (something he never really even had in NY) and hopefully on the second line not facing the other teams best checking line...I would think it is possible for him to get back to the 2.5 shots per game...but maybe more reasonable to expect 2.2-2.3 per game (he still got over 2 last year). -Lets go with 2.25 shots per game, and 12.5 shooting percentage (I think both are very reasonable for goals for Moulson, and COULD be exceeded if everything goes right). You are looking at 185 shots over a full season, and 23 goals. I think that is what SHOULD be expected. -I think it is REASONABLE to expect 200 shots and 13% for shooting percentage, which would put him at 26 goals. If all things fall into place, I think he can still get 30+ goals, but I think a reasonable expectation would be 23-26 goals if he is healthy and on a second line...as a 31-32 year old winger. Any thoughts?

Looks like we might have a couple players join the 500 career goal club next year.... -Who does it first? Ovechkin or Hossa? Hossa needs 14, Ovechkin needs 25. Hossa is 36 years old and had 22 last year...Ovi is 29 and had 53 last year. -Rick Nash will be 31 when the season starts and needs 122 goals to get there. He's had 119 in the last 4 years (one shortened season). Does he get there by his mid 30's...or does his production drop off and he comes up a bit short? -Crosby has 302..needs 198 more. With his injury history, does he make it? Over the last 4 seasons, he has averaged a 33 goal pace over an 82 game season...at that rate he would need almost 6 seasons to reach 500...but what are the odds of him playing 82 games ever year with his injury history? So does he make it? and if so...when? -Stamkos looks like the next player after the above ones with a shot at it..and he is likely to make it (in my opinion) but he is still pretty far off. Anyone have any opinions on this topic?

To keep it in the same era, how about Crosby v Toews......if you want to use Gretzky...more like Gretzky v Messier (after Gretzky traded to a different team, of course)

I think expectations should be ratcheted down a bit here. There is something to the players needing to get used to each other, and that takes time. Its not only learning tendencies on the ice of teamates, it is also learning the new 'system' the coach puts in (maybe easy to learn a new system, but it takes time to master it.) I wouldn't even put it by anyone that getting used to personalities in the locker room can have a SLIGHT impact on a teams performance. That all takes time...mostly mastering what the coaches want you to do and getting used to linemate tendencies. I'd expect that to not happen right away, and this team starting out slowly. By the end of the year, it will be a lot better, but STILL not to the point of where it will be next season or the season after. This isn't fantasy hockey or NHL whatever for the PS4 or Xbox.

I go back and forth on this. In a perfect world, I'd like to see a guy like this under contract long term for $5m-6m a year. A 2 way center is great, but you usually reserve top Dollars for someone who will fill the net with the best of them. (a consistent 25+ goal scorer, year after year) I guess you have to look at the fact that the cap LOOKS like it is going to go up considerably in the next few years. IN the early years of the contract, the cap hit may be close to (or slightly over) 10% of your entire cap, but in the later years, if it is down to 8% that is a pretty good deal. I don't know. I would like for them to have a player, as good as he is, like him for $6 a year tops.....but demand is what it is...if you want something bad enough, you have to pay the asking price. Truth is...the Sabres don't have any other options available to them right now that are 85-90% as good as him that they can pay 85-90% as much as they are going to pay him.

I actually agree with him 'literally'. I think, long term, it would be best for the Sabres to not make the playoffs. Not only low expecations, but they would also get that lottery pick again (to either use or as trade bait the higher it is). But, that doesn't mean I don't WANT them to make the playoffs. I do. I want them to make the playoffs, but they may be slightly better long term if they didn't this year.

I'm interested in the Amerks also. I really hope they can somehow get more of their games on TV.

I hate the idea of not trading in the division. If you are getting the best offer form the division, then go for it. The ONLY way I can see it not happening is if you are the 'other team' are clearly the class of the division, look to fight it out for the division title for the next few years, AND the trade will fill a bigger hole for them than it will for you. Even with that, I still say get the best deal available no matter where it is from. What are they really afraid of? The majority of the time, the only downside to trading in the division is IF you lose the trade, that "Loss" will be more visible.

Surprised we got to 7 replies to this topic without someone saying that last year we "took the wrong Sam".