mjd1001

I did check a week or two ago, and I think the Sabres were actually 4th in empty net goals allowed when I looked. Chicago was #1.

Cozens just has ZERO awareness. After Samuelsson went down to try to block that shot, Cozens skates by him as Samuelsson is getting up. Skinner is looking into the corner and doesn't even see Samuelsson getting up off the ice and Cozens skates aright into his teammate almost taking him down again.

There are a few articles about how Jerry Jones is running the Cowboys now. Still spending money, but he's spending less on coaches (compared to the rest of the league) and they have signed less higher priced free agents in the last few years than they have in the past. Sure, they are still spending, but as another billionaire with the most valuable franchise in North American sports, why is it that, like Pegula, as he gets older the pocketbook is seeming to not get more open, but in many ways tighter? (CBSsports had an article up earlier in the day I can't find the link to it now but it explained a lot of the monetary corners Jones is cutting now that he hadn't done in the past)) It seems like with some owners, not all but some, as the get older, and richer, they are more protective of their money.

Agree, in part because those guys might not be much of an upgrade. But more importantly if that happened it would show Pegula wants the status quo....and by status quo I mean the part where nothing too radical happens that he doesn't like, that everything runs through him, etc. If you are going to make front office changes, you need something major.

I'd be very surprised by that. There has been talk about Crosby wanting to retire a penguin, some media guys saying he wants to be there till the end, etc. You don't always believe that....but I have seen a couple interviews with him on the topic and he comes across like he really, REALLY does not want to leave Pittsburgh, even to a better team.

So maybe it was know around the league that Rantanen was avaiable and no one wanted to make any other moves until they knew if they were in, or not in, on him. Now that he is moved, maybe other teams looking to add may look to the Sabres for 'lesser' players than Rantanen and we'll get some movement?

worse in almost every single way... https://www.naturalstattrick.com/linestats.php?fromseason=20232024&thruseason=20242025&stype=2&sit=ev&score=all&rate=n&team=BUF&vteam=ALL&view=wowy&loc=B&gpfilt=none&fd=2023-10-10&td=2025-04-17&tgp=2000&strict=incl&p1=8481524&p2=8480839&p3=0&p4=0&p5=0 Although one thing to keep in mind...who are the other players on the ice with him when he is out there with Dahlin vs with someone else. When Byram and Dahlin are together, they are likely playing with the Sabres top line (Thompson, Tuch) more. When Bryam is out there with Power or someone else, they are likely with Cozens, or the 3rd line. Never, EVER underestimate the negative impact Dylan Cozens can have on a player, he can even tank a D-mans stats. For Example: Byram with Thompson: 403 minutes, 30 goals for , 12 goals allowed (5 on 5) Bryam with Cozens: 355 minutes 14 goals for, 22 goals allowed. The forwards a D-man has out there with him and the support they give him can be just as important, maybe more so, than his D-partner. In this case, Bryams GF AND GA are much better when on the ice with Tage than when Cozens is out there at center. I like goals for and goals allowed vs expected goals for and allowed because it takes account shooting percentage, not just shot locations, but if you dig deep into the advanced stats, they kinda mirror the same thing (slight differences) as actual goals. Yet another reason Cozens needs to be ejected off of this team immediatly if they refuse to move him to wing.

I don't think yo uare getting Rantanen. Even if he doesn't sign with Colorado, I think a lot of other teams will be willing to pay up for him that will be more appealing for me. The rest of what you said, it still is mind boggling to me why Cozens is still here. He's a bad hockey player overall. 2 years ago he was an overall bad hockey player who had a career scoring year of 31 goals, and now he is reverting to the norm of being a bad hockey player overall again. As far as Bryam and Power....I go back and forth. What is Bryam's willingness to sign here and for how much? Whether to trade one of them to me depends on that.

Mostly because the team is bad of course. Western conference late start doesn't help. But for me, and I'm sensing some others, its because they haven't made any changes. Its like they don't care. There is nothing new to watch, nothing new to talk about. Sure you can 'stick to the plan' of developing from within, but when that isn't working, and you have going on what, year 4 or year 5 of this particular version of the plan and you really aren't making any significant roster changes for the fans to at least....well, be interested in? It just doesn't work for a fanbase.

The problem is he went to first line center, and his former linemate (Quinn) scored 3 times in his first 2 games without Cozens....and the line Cozens joined the first game (Thompson and Tuch) had their worst game of the season with him (I think they had no points and their single worst 'minus' game of the year for them). Not exactly good for showing him off.

With every day that goes by, I fear the opposite. The team has shown very little that makes me think they don't think/want him as a big part of the future. He's 4th among forwards in ice time. Hes a fixture on either the 2nd or the first team PowerPlay. When tage got hurt and couldn't take faceoffs/play center, Cozens was promoted to first line center. I will be shocked (and delighted) if he isn't here next year.

I agree. Maybe, MAYBE you could say to get one of their 30-32 year old veteran guys, but thats only really going to help you for this year. This year is over. NO trade should be made for this year at this point. The other question is, the "NHL ready guys". If we are talking Helenius or Rosen, shop them around the rest of the league. I can't imagine with how bad of a situation Pittsburgh is in, that you can't find ANY other deal that will beat what they can offer. What Pittsburgh has to offer isn't much more than a Joke. Crosby isn't coming here, beyond that, nothing. Their top 10 guys all have a form of a no trade/no move deal. Beyond that, not a single player I think I'd want that will help this Sabres team next year.

I'm not rooting for a loss, but for those who are its not all about the draft picks. Some root for losses in the hope that things get SO bad that it will force more changes, whether that is trades, GM/coach changes, or even massive roster changes. So again, I personally do not watch the games myself rooting for a loss....to me its more one-night entertaiment...but its not all about the draft picks for those that do.

I'm not sure what gets just as much in a trade. Maybe they don't, maybe they get more. If the Sabres end up picking 8th, another team may like on of their existing prospects more than what they think they can get with the 8th overall pick. My point is all things being equal (and none of us know if they are equal, or slanted more to one side or the other), but all things being equal, I would rather make a trade, but doing so even out the ages of the prospect pool.

Maybe. To me I'd rather not trade the first if you have some of your former first rounders who might get just as much in a trade. Östlund, Kulich, Rosen, Helenius, Benson, Quinn, Peterka, Wahlberg...they are all forwards just below or just above 20 years of age. I don't think there is going to be room, cap space, desire to keep ALL of those forwards close to that age on the roster. Who you are going to draft is likely now 17 years old. I'd rather trade one of bunch of guys that are all close to 20 and keep the guy who is 17.

My daily Cozens bashing: It is almost getting comical how whenever Lindy changes line, whoever goes with Cozens gets worse and whoever leaves him to go to another line gets better. I usually look at the basic stats, which shows this clearly. (+/-, points) But after rewatching last nights game, I looked into just what happened last night. Last night Tuch spent the night with Cozens (And Kozak): Rel CF% for Cozens-Tuch-Kozak: -21.64. Benson-Krebs-Quinn: -3.63. Thompson-Kulich-Peterka: +21.96 Rel Fenwisk. Cozens-Tuch-Kozak: -17.65. Benson-Krebs-Quinn: -9.02. Thompson-Kulich-Peterak: +21.16 Cozens rarely makes his linemates better. In most cases their production (and for last nights game with new line-mate, their underlying metrics) crash and burn when they are put on the ice with Cozens.

I agreed with you as that is a possibility... The whole idea of a 'kid line' I don't think was bad. The issue is it should be a 3rd line, not a 2nd line. Is Kulich ready to be the centerpiece of a new 'kid' line? Hopefully the rest of the year this season will tell us that. However, unless he puts up 15 goals in the last 30 games (unlikely), if he IS ready for a role it should be on the 3rd line only AND only with a legit 2nd line put together above him. As far as McLeod, I don't see an issue with him as a 3rd or 4th line center at all. When I watch him, I see LESS mistakes from him away from the puck than I do from most other forwards on this team. Its not like he makes no mistakes, he does, but he makes much less. Add to that hes on an 18 goal, 44 point pace (and doing that with No powerplay time), and he is a plus player on a minus team...I don't see the issue with him. He is the kind of player I LIKE on the bottom 6.

Kulich to me is not ideal as a top 6 center at THIS time. Next year? I don't think he's ready to be productive enough to be a top 6 center. BUT, I'd rather have him than Cozens. If its Cozens vs Kulich, give me Kulich. If its a different veteran vs those 2, give me the other option (likely). As far as Kozak? Sure, bottom 6 Center. I differ in that I like McLeod in a bottom 6 role. But Kozak, Krebs, McLeod, I'll take 2 of the 3, I don't care which 2.

It seems like a lot of the forum is splintering into 2 groups. Defend UPL, he's totally fine and any problem with him is with those in front of him...... -or- UPL is bad, He is what his current stats say he is and that is a bad goalie, the new contract was an awful decision. I still think it is neither of those, its in the middle. I think he is a good goalie (capable of being a good #1), he is someone that can on any given year has a ceiling to be a top 5-10 guy. But THIS YEAR his play isn't good. Its not all on those in front of him. HIS play is worse than it was last year. HE is allowing more soft goals than last year. He has not been as good as last year, indepedant of the play around him. That doesn't mean he can't be the #1 guy going forward, in my opinion he should be. It just means that this year, HIS play has been below average overall.

I'd take a good vet 2nd pair D-man for Cozens, or a winger even. Krebs is not a top 6 Center, but I think this team is better with him in that role temporarily than with Cozens and how much he hurts you. Would I RATHER have a guy who is the long term solution at Center in exchange for Cozens? Sure, but even if you get this, this current season is lost. I can deal with Krebs there for the rest of the year, in order to maximize the return for Cozens, in case someone is offering a better player at wing or D. UPL is THIS team's #1. I think he has the potenital to be a 'real' NHL #1. Is he a #1 now? Well, by default, but I need LAST years UPL to feel comfortable with him. One great game, one bad game, one "OK" game...then rinse and repeat.....a LOT of mediocre goalies can do that for a team also.

The past few weeks haven't changed my opinion on the matter: -If you can get a GREAT return for ONE of them (and if its Power, sign Byram), then make the deal. If not, keep both. I'm would not be upset either way. -Byram is better now, but by no means is he 'great'. He doesn't have close to the overall game that Dahlin has. Yet, he is still good. -Power is 'just as good' but only 1 out of every 5 games. Overall he's not as good. But, I think he is the type of player that will get a lot better, its just going to take a few years.

Yep. UPL has been worse than last year. The team in front of him is bad, but to me he clearly is not playing as well as last year and letting in more bad goals.

I'd rather have some movement. I've seen for long enough that the roster isn't good enough.

I'm going more and more away from 'its coaching' with the special teams and putting this more on the players: 1.) PK is mostly a function of maintaining discipline. Stay in the 4 point-box formation and let the other team pass the puck around the perimeter. Its a battle of willpower, will the PK get anxious and try to make a move toward the puck and break discipline BEFORE the PP unit forces a pass or shot before it is available? Sure there are great plays made out there, but when I watch PK and PP units around the league, it is just as much about the very simple to teach (by the coaches), hard to play (by the players) art of above. When you watch the Sabres PK goals allowed, I would dare say most of them are when they lose discipline and start chasing. When you watch one of their effective PK's, it is USUALLY when they stay 100% discipline and stay in their positions most of the time, with only an 'occasional' move SLIGHTLY out of their spot to pressure the puck when a sloppy pass is made. We can think back to many PP's the Sabres are on where the other team stays 100% discipline against them, they stay in the perfect rectangle formation and it is so frustrating because when you play that discipline, unless your last name is McDavid or Gretzky and you can do something phenominal with the puck, there usually is nothing to do except kill off your own penalty by passing it around and around. Penalty Killing there is one team that has been in the top 5 overall every year for the last few years, and they also are the best combined over the last few years. Carolina. What do they do? The guys that get minutes are mostly older, taller (cover more territory with their reach when they are stading still) guys. Vets who don't take chances. Watch their PK when the Sabres play them. They probably maintain discipline in their rectangle 80%+ of the time. They don't go chasing pucks into the corner when they have a teammate there already. Their effectiveness is not a Hasek-like goalie (that helps), but it for sure isn't the coach re-inventing the PK. That is the coach demanding guys do what they all KNOW they have to do, and the players being veteran, and discipline enough to do it. Now, the Hurricanes DO pressure the puck more than some teams, they will have ONE guy but ONE guy only go to the puck when its loose (they have a somewhat high-pressue) system, but the key to it, if you watch replays, is that they almost always maintain that rectangle formation. If a Forward goes to the puck on the boards, everyone usually slides over SLIGHTLY but maintain position/discipline. It is the players discipline, their quick thinking, their experience that allows them to do what they do, not coaching x's and o's. That is very simple coaching, it is on the players to execute, and we have some guys that just don't do it. 2.) PP. Yes, there is a little more complex coaching here, but nothing is re-inventing the wheel. There are only so many zone entries to try, so many ways to break a PK discipline, and I'm sure that every coach around the league knows every single one (and if you don't, you can easily see them watching film of other teams.). The only real 'coaching' here is to yell at your guys when they don't do what they are supposed to do, or to maybe advance scout the other team and to see where THEY are not discipline and do your entries/formation to take advantage of that. Again, very easy stuff. There was a night a couple of months ago I was home alone and went to NHL's web site and watched every single PP goal scored (since then I followed up and did that again but on nights with lesser games), and what I observed was this: More than half of PP goals scored were a result of scrums in front of the net where someone whacked away at the puck and it went in (luck), or a bad rebound by a goalie (bad goalie play), or a deflection (luck or the defense failing to clear out someone), or a weak shot that the goalie didin't see that was screened (luck/not clearing out). Basically, the majority of goals scored were not about coaching (good or bad on the PP or the PK) but rather players doing a SIMPLE job that college, junior, or even high school hockey players know to do. There is one team that is always seems to be in the top 5 in PP (over the last few years). Its NOT Edmonton, NOT Toronto....it IS Tampa. Why Tampa? They are a veteran team, a very discipline team in the offensive zone, and they have talented players, not the MOST talented, but above average talented guys who have played with each other SOOO much that there are very few surprises. When you watch their PP, the coaches don't have any magic, there is little to nothing you see them do that other teams don't do. No magical zone entries, no plays/passing formations that are inventive. Its just talented guys that stay VERY discipline, make few mistakes, and know each other very well. So maybe the failure of coaching is not just telling the players what to do, but getting it through their heads when they don't want to follow instructions. But to me I think the PK and PP failures are less the coaches not teaching or not knowing the X's and O's, but rather this falls on the players not being discipline. I mean, many on this forum think this team has hardly any discipline in their 5-on-5 play, why would the PP and PK be any different?

I understand the sentiment, but the on-ice product needs work. If the owner doesn't decide to change the orchestrator, do we just keep the end result product on the ice we have now?