mjd1001

Short answer: I really don't now. Longer answer: You start by playing the way this team played after Jan 1 of last year, for more than half the season. The team turned a corner in some ways almost literally after Jan 1. Skinner played less. UPL took over as your #1 goalie. Part of that was after trading Mitts for Byram. You moved on from Okposo. Cozens actually started playing better in his own zone (although he seems to have regressed this year again.) All those things happened (primarily) after Jan 1 and the team went 24-18-2 and were a postive 24 in goal differential. That is your starting point -In that time after Jan 1 where the team played better, Skinner had his ice time reduced (the last 2 months of the season he was down to the 13-14 minute mark per game). He played 39 games, had 9 goals (less than a 19 goal pace per 82). He also didn't score in the last 13 games in a row. So, when this team played its best, for more than 1/2 the season, it was when Skinner had his ice time reduced and was scoring at a 19 goal per season pace. How do you replace that production? Have a winger on your roster score 10-15 and actually play defense so they prevent 4-9 goals vs Skinner over the rest of the year. -Mitts. Since the team starting playing better Jan 1 until he was traded, he played in 24 games, and scored 4 goals. He did have 12 assists, but that puts him at 13.5 goal, 54 point pace. Easy to replace with what the Sabres have no? No, but not a monumental lift. They also were 10-8-2 in the 20 games after he traded, so not a huge drop moving him out and Byram in. How do you replace his production? Simple, Tage and Cozens need to pick up what they did last year. Tage actually DID the 2nd half of the season, Cozens needs to lift up the rest. So the medium length (and best) answer to your question: Line #1 (Tage, Tuch, Peterka)..you need to get 90-95 + goals out of them. Line #2 (Cozens, Benson, Quinn)..you need to get 65-70+ goals out of them. For me thats it. IF we want to say the Bottom 2 lines are the same (or SLIGHTLY improved from last years team), then have the first 2 produce at that level, and you are there. Forget about 'just' career years, lets look at the last 3 years (ups AND downs combined). Tuch averaged about 29 goals per 82 games and is now in his prime. Tage averaged 41.5 goals per 82 over the last 3 seasons. JJ in his 2 full seasons averages about 21, almost had 30 last year and is still not in his prime yet. On the first line he will get more ice time and more chances. Again, is it a guarantee to happen? Nope, but that is HOW this team plays well, those players have it in them. You are paying Cozens over $7m per season, hes still a train wreck in his own zone so for him to 'earn' his money he should be able to give you close to 30 (he needs to). The above gets you there. Now, if they DON'T do that, you have a big problem. But they are capable of doing it, now its just those players, and the coaching staff, getting them to that point. I'm not 100% sure its going to happen, but after 2 games I certainly am not at the sky-is-falling, doom and gloom, this team will never ever win again point....that many others appear to be at.

I get all the concern, they didn't look good the first 2 games, but I really really need to see a lot more bad before I get to the point a lot of you have gotten to already. If they miss the playoffs by a lot, yeah, then my 'opinion' from October 7th will be wrong, I'll admit it at the time, but I think a lot of the problems that many are saying are so apparent...not all of them are that big of problems, yet.

That is part of it. The other part is, if you GET that guy, will Pegula stand back, not insist on input into hockey decisions? As I have said in another tread, Pegula seems to want input (at least to me he does) in hockey decisions more than he does with football decisions. And, why would he hire a guy that he knows will tell him to 'take a hike' or 'get lost' when he wants to be heard.

I agree, but I just don't think he will do that. I truly think he wants to be involved in decision making on the Sabres side of things much more than he should be. He's not just an owner who says "keep me informed, don't make a move until you tell me before". Rather he is someone that wants to be in MOST important personal decisions, and he wants to tell the GM his opinion, and if the decision is close his opinion is the deciding factor. I think that is what has been happening and I don't think its changing.

This play wasn't good. The clock management was awful too. I think all coaches make mistakes. I think McDermott is a pretty good coach, I don't want him fired now. I didn't want him fired last year, nor after 13 seconds. HOWEVER, lets see how this season goes. If this season goes worse than expectations and we see more signs of things like this, I'll be open to a change at the end of the year.

Still want to see more. Last year Florida lost their first 2 games, outscored 8-4. They had a few (at least 3) streaks in the year where they lost 4 in a row or 4 out of 5 (most teams do). They were shut out SEVEN times last year, and had another 8 games where they only scored 1 goal. So 15 times their fans thought they couldn't generate hardly any offense. Washington made the playoffs last year. Being a negative 37 in goal differential. They started 1-4 in their first 5 games last year, being outscored 19-7 and shut out once, including losses to Pittsburgh, Ottawa, and Montreal. They were awful for the first 2-2.5 weeks of the season. They they went on an 9-1-1 run over the next 11 games. Later in the year, they had another run where they lost 8 out of 9. IN the NHL, teams have pretty big swings. Streaks where good teams can look like the worst team in the league, and the other way around. We need more time. 2 bad games in the NHL i like having a bad first half in your first game in the NFL. You CAN recover. I get it, a few examples of someone else doing it doesn't mean the Sabres will, but it can (and does) happen after early season slow starts. I want to get to game 10 before even making an initial judgement on this Sabres team.

What are the odds (simple math) of a team going 13 straight years and not make the playoffs once? The statistical odds of missing 13 years in a row would be 1 in 11,062. There is NO WAY the one constant in that time (Pegula) doesn't have a lot to do with it. Terrible owner.

This is the biggest misconception I think on this board right now about Cozens. He is not a shutdown player. Far from. Maybe his raw talent, his size, his aggressiveness makes people think he could be. But he might be the farthest center on this team or forward on this entire team in terms of a shutdown player. He is a literal machine at making bad decisions. He has virtually no sense of what position to be on the ice. On the pk, for years now, he is a one-man disaster. There was a posting and thread I made about this a couple days ago, but look at the replay of the first goal allowed in the preseason. That's not an exception, that's the rule. Cozens has been, and continues to be the single best weapon the Opposing team has on the power play when He is on the ice. I haven't totally given up on him as a player, he has the raw talent, but he is, absolutely, positively, nowhere near being a shutdown player. He might be the worst forward the Sabres have on the team in that regard. Granato kept forcing him on the PK because I think he was trying to mold him into that role. It didn't work. Hopefully Ruff doesn't experiment quite as long with him.

Yeah, but I blame more the oringial post, the person who brought up politics to begin with that started it. The first person to bring up politics needs a bad. Not so much the people responding to it.

This is what happens when we have posters that CANNOT CONTROL themselves and have to post their poltical point of view. I do not like your response, but anyone who posts politics in here (starts posting it) should get a 3-5 day cool down 'ban'.

That 'has been' coach had a better record with that team than they were after he was fired last year, and probably had the most decimated roster in the NHL by injuries last year. Plus I think if there is an issue with this team, we are seeing its the players (or owner). The have had enough coaches, with different backgrounds, different styles... over the years, the results never change.

No not at all. I'm not saying the last 4 years were good (pretty bad) but the other guy is a train wreck. Mods, are we going to let this political thing go? If so I'm really do go at it with someone who brings it up in a gameday thread.

Better than what we had the previous 4 years.

I agree the Devils are good. I have said all offseason that I think they should compete for the top of the conference. BUT, this 'core' has to at least be able to compete with that. This core...Dahlin, Cozens, Tuch, Quinn, Power.....THIS is the group that is going to make a run at the cup IF its ever going to happen. If this core is so far away from other teams they need to beat, then you aren't getting a new core for close to another decade.

It looks like the Sabres are playing in a video game where the setting has their skating speed at 10% less than the other team. They aren't keeping up with the opponent often, and they aren't even accelerating well. Its almost like every shift they look like they are winded tired, at the end of a long shift even when they just get out there.

As I said above, that applies to New Jersey too...doesn't seem to be impacting them as much.

One defense (excuse) for the way the Sabres are playing is there is a new coach. New system. It will take the players a little bit of time to get used to that. Only problem with that is, the same thing is true for the team they are playing against. Should 'even' that part of it out.

Ok, are we looking for something positive, time to reach really deep? 2 years ago Ruff coached New Jersey and they started 0-2, ourscored 10 to 4 in those 2 games by Philly and Detroit. They proceeded to then go 52-20-8 the rest of the year. Maybe here? possibly? a SLIGHT chance?

Power playing a bit sloppy, I've seen 3 plays this period that were giveaways, or plays that led to giveaways, with Power just being a tad bit careless.

It does make sense...Byram and power both had more ice time than Dahlin did yesterday, and through 2 periods they are all really close (I think Bryam again has more ice time). Last year Dahlin was a couple minutes ahead of everyone most games.

100% agree. Yeah, if you want to win, I guess you have to have some kind of balance, but I fall way, WAY on the side of scoring, entertaining end to end hockey. I don't care if my goalie has a 3.5+ GAA and .900 or below save percentage..IF I know that most games I watch I am going to see the good guy score at least 3-4 goals and explode for 6-7+ a couple times per month.

He is very polarizing, probably the most polarizing player on this team. I think he has the raw talent to be good, but I think he actually has been a player that has done more harm to this team with his play (last year) than he has done good. There are people that vehemently disagree. Even this game, I saw the 'same old' Cozens, making terrible hockey decisions, yet there are at least a few other people that think he had a good game.

Okay, it's a little bit early in the season... An hour after game one... But we have some people going after each other. Pretty hard on here... I think the ignore list is going to be getting pretty big for some of us very soon. And that's too bad. I do really like hearing opposing points of view to my own almost as much as when people agree with me... It makes for good conversation. I'm just not sure how long a lot of us will be able to deal with the over-the-top emotion one game into the season.

The play in the offensive zone was obviously the problem. Not many great chances. Nothing 'creative' that worked. They either didn't have room to operate or didn't make their own room. Lots of bad decisions in the offensive zone (Thompson passing the puck to Tuch when Thompson had a better shot....Cozens had time to do ANYTHING with the puck and he shoots it into the legs of a defender from the blue line). It goes without saying, but play the same game from the red line back but with a couple better plays in the offensive zone and a lot of us are talking much differently about this game.

Ok, I don't know if I want to re-watch this game, I have better thing to do but... They did outshoot and equal hits with the devils on the scorecard. The goals they allowed, one was a dumb play by Samuelsson that Zucker didin't handle his side of and it was a blatant turnover. Another goal allowed was a lucky tip. Yeah, they didn't play well, and on in the offensive zone they were awful. But in the D-zone, they weren't 'awful', just...average...breakout passes need work.