mjd1001

Probably, but not 100%. There are first and early 2nd rounders that looked liked busts until they got to 24 or later... -Lawson Crouse averaged under 10 goals per season, he only hit 20+ after he turned 24. -Joel Erikson Ek played 4 seasons without hitting 10 goals, after his 24 year old season, he has scored 20-30 every year since -Sam Bennet was widely considered a bust, averaging just over 10 goals a season until he was 25. At 25, he scored 28. -Jared McCann never got out of the teens in goals through 24 years of age. Since he turned 25, he has scored 27, 40, and 29. -Elias Lindholm only reached the teens in goals until he was 24, at 25 he put up 29 goals, and at 27 hit 40. -Valeri Nikushkin put up 46 total goals over 6 seasons (including a season he played 59 games with ZERO goals) through 25 years old. In the 3 years since he turned 26 he has 70 goals in 169 games (34 goal per 82 pace) -Ryan Hartman was another first round pick. He played in the NHL from age 20-26, never breaking the teens, and most of the time in single digits for goals. At age 27 he scored 34. There are other examples. Now, with all that said, I personally don't think Krebs has 'it'. He supposedly has great vision/passing, but I remember ONE time all last season he seemed to see the ice well and made a good pass. If they cut him or traded him for a mid round pick now, I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Its just that...every once in a while, you have guys that look like totals busts and end up 'getting it' past age 24.

I guess my thinking is...We are where right now very close to what Taro T is saying, yet its possible to get to where LTS is saying. My question is, how long between those? And at what point does some super-rich owner who may (or may not) know anything about AI programming decide he/she wants to develop a department to try to see what it can do for the team. Maybe its not strictly "learning AI" but something like....analyzing film of your own players just like coaches do, but analyzing each player and doing so almost frame by frame, 1/10th of a second by 10th of a second, seeing how often they react one way vs react another way, spitting out trends on every player in the league in more detail than ever before..and going from there? Seeing how you can exploit other players, or how your players can get better, not on a macro level, but on a tiny small micro level that coaches haven't broken down film before. Maybe almost as close as seeing a player who 'tips' which way he is going to pass the puck by the slightest positioning of his hands on his stick, or a small 'tell' that someone positions their feet slightly differently before a pass vs a shot. Something that coaches simply cannot analyze every single player on ever team, frame by frame of video...that a computer can do in a matter of minutes.

Maybe anyone out there is interested in this topic, Its not something I think about all the time but I do think about it. What is next after analytics...AI? Or maybe AI makes analytics better/more useful? And what exactly is AI we are talking about? In some ways Artificial intelligence is overhyped, it is no where near doing some things we want. In other ways, it is so far advanced, doing things we haven't ever dreamt of. In the middle, AI is advanced but it really isn't what we think of AI as...it is analyzing tons of data but in some ways its not quite teaching itself and evolving as much as we thought it would be. Put that discussion aside, Can it give a team an edge in a sport? Can AI analyze tactics in hockey, maybe play calling in football, and determine trends quicker than a whole room full of coaches does now? Can it 'look for' trends analyzing ALL data (even data we don't look at) and learn which prospects are more likely to be stars? Or maybe the particular type of 'development' a player needs to better reach their peak? Think about this, trends that have worked in sports (the trap, the left wing lock in hockey, or different formations in football), at one point they weren't being used, someone thought of them, put them into play......can't things like that be 'thought' of quicker and discovered and tested 'quicker' by using complex programs/AI based software? Maybe complex programs aren't there yet, and might be years away, but how much should each team be investing into this? Should a team like the Sabres or Bills hold open interviews....interview software engineers who are involved in AI and basically say to them "We don't know much about AI in sports, but tell us what you think YOU can do to implement an AI program and tell us how it can help us?" I saw a post in Twitter and it is showing the current level of software/AI...how much it actually is impacting Amazon right now, that is what got me thinking. Anyone have any thoughts?

Maybe they will give up fewer goals...but...the key may be to just not 'mess up' how they played in the 2nd half of last season giving up goals, whether that is through goaltending, defensive play, or both. Personally, I think something changed with this team right about January 1, where the forwards started playing MUCH better from the turn of the calendar into 2024 through the end of the season. One of the things I enjoy is looking at each goal allowed game by game (I try to post about it after games) and see if there was something OBVIOUS that caused the goals allowed. And usually, it was a forward (or a couple of them) that made an OBVIOUS mistake that led to close to 1/2 of the goals allowed. That almost stopped after the first of the year. Sure, the PK had some issues, and Cozens still chased a lot to get him out of position, but they got a lot better and it was noticable. The Sabres allowed a total of 112 goals in their last 44 games (basically since the calendar turned to 2024.) That's about 2.55 goals per 60/game. Over 82 games, that is 209 goals allowed. Over last season, only 2 teams allowed less goals than that. If part of that is UPL, and part of that is the forwards just playing better in their own zone, then I think...don't mess that up! just find a way to score 3-4 more goals per month and you are where you need to be. They did score 135 since Jan 1 while allowing 112. They were a plus 23 in goal differential. YES, I KNOW that we can always take small segments of a season and project them over long stretches to make a point we want to make...and it always doesn't work. So, this math exercise can be dangerous. But, a +35 over the last 44 games (NOT an insignificant sample size) is a +65 over an 82 game stretch. Remember, in the league, and in particular the east, if you are a positive team over the entire year in goal differential, you make the playoffs more than 90% of the time. Only 2 teams last year were better than a +65 for the season. So again, yeah, every team has stretches like that. But again, take what you did for the 2nd half of last year...make it a bit better but don't mess up what they started to do.

I think Austin Matthews should not be in there...adding to the 'under 30' crowd.

The numbers you posted make sense, but I think the path to more goals is this: -Last year was the outlier for Tage since he became center because of an injury, the 2 years prior are what we should expect. He needs to be well above 40, close to 50 if he stays healthy. -Quinn and JJP. As mentioned they are still young, their shooting percentage and previous shot totals hopefully can be improved on. If healthy, MAYBE you can get 60 from those 2 combined. -Cozens. You listed 19. I think that is close to reality, his 30+ goal season was the outlier. BUT, he DID it once so maybe he can do it again. 25 hopefully? -If Tuch is on the first line and still getting PP time I want/need 25-30 from him. I think that is the path to more goals. Does it happen? you can't count on health/lack of injury, but if they can say pretty healthy, I think the above is possible.

One of the first thoughts a certain very close family member came up with....alas, too bad it wasn't that easy.

We don't know exactly where he lives. A few neighbors say he comes from up the main road connected to ours a mile or two. And of course, speeding down our street, there really isn't a chance to talk to him. We did lose a tree at the entrance to our community about 1.5 years ago. A teenager then has driving a full size truck, took the turn too fast entering the community, lost control, spun over the sidewalk and took out a tree (while the full size truck he drove was totaled.) No one knows for sure, but a few people in the community think its the same 'kid' (teenager) this time instead of his parents buying him a $50,000 full size truck when he was 16 or 17, he's now 18 or 19 and driving a Porsche SUV.

We have a 'kid' in our neighborhood (by kid, maybe anywhere from 16-21 years old), who drives a Porsche SUV and is an absolute terror. I notice him going up and down our street a couple times a day sometimes. The speed limit here is 30, its a narrow, house lines side street, yet he is going 50, maybe 55. I'm not sure if it is a custom exhaust but it is louder than I would think he and revs the engine pretty often. There is a park around the block, last week I saw him pull out of the park as fast as the vehicle could probably go, ignore the stop sign and full speed just enter the road and take it full speed. A few neighbors have called or emailed the police, and they say they will keep an eye out, but they can't do anything unless they see it themself. Last week it wasn't close to someone getting hurt, but a guy down the street was VERY upset because he was playing catch with his young son in the front yard and he said the SUV sped by right in front the yard again, going at least 50mph he said. The family that lives at the corner say they noticed it all summer because they hear the squealing of the wheels as he blows through the stop sign all the time and takes the 90 degree turn at very high speed a few times per week in front of their house. Last night I was walking around the block with my wife, he pulled up to the stop sign in the community and actually stopped. There was another 'kid' in the car with him, at the stop sign they got out, switched seats....and then revved the engine, turned left onto the other side street, with the tires squealing and the engine revving while taking off at least 40-50, mph down the side street. I have that on video. You can't see the license plate, but you can see and hear the vehicle and the driving. I'm considering stopping at the police dept and showing them, I just hope if I do there is something they can actually do about it..not just say "we can't do anything unless we see it ourselves"

it is an interesting discussion. I'll be interested to see what the over/under odds will be for individual players goals. Of the above, I'd put Thompson at 46, Tuch at 27, Cozens at 20, Zucker at 15 (a LOT of variables on him though because we have no idea how he will be used)

I'd be mildly suprised by the first 3. Unless there is an injury I'll be surprised it Tage doesn't get well OVEr 40 goals. Tuch and Cozens have 30 in them (they did it 2 seasons ago), but until I see it under Ruff, i'm only seeing about 20 for Cozens and 25 for Tuch. So, I guess that is close enough that it the DO hit 30 I won't be TOTALLY surprised. Zucker at 20 to me is also a stretch. Unless he end up being on the PP AND gets top 6 minutes and opportunities, I think he tops out in the teens.

I am too, until they give me reason to not be. I just wish the season wasn't starting overseas against New Jersey. While some may not like the Lindy hire, I think if the season opener was in Buffalo there would be a lot of energy in that building (as much as can be for a new coach) and it would be fun to watch. I also think that New Jersey has a shot at being the best team in the league, and this Sabres team might start the season 0-2, which will take a lot of energy out of things, simply because they have to start with 2 games against New Jersey.

It sounds good, but if he really feels that strongly....why is this the first year he did this in almost 14 years (I think) that he has been GM of the team?

Hopefully the coaches know how to evaluate that. they see him do 10 times (if not more) the reps in practice vs other players. Hopefully they can tell that, and hopefully he IS a diamond-in-the-rough that the team has found.

I agree with most of what you said above...but I could go either way on the Skinner part. I probably would have kept Skinner for one more year. I defended him quite a bit last year on this forum...but.... How much of a loss is it? He's 32, going on 33 this year, and it looked like last year (2nd half) the 'decline' with age may be starting. Over the last 3 seasons, Skinner has scored goals at a 32 goal-per-82-game pace. He has done that with first line opportunities getting just under 17 minutes of ice time. Jason Zucker is 32, has scored goals at a 21-22 goal pace per 82 games over the last 3 seasons, doing so with about 10%-15% less ice time than Skinner and not always being on the PP or with the top line. So, a guy scores at about 10 goals less per year pace, but maybe give him Skinners linemates and Skinners opportunities and ice time and that difference is less than 10 goals. Add to that you are paying him less money, and he MAY bring other things (maybe they view him as a better worker, more willing to enter the defensive zone), plus while Zucker isn't 'fast', he is faster skating than Skinner. So maybe I'm reaching, but maybe you give up the 'up to' 10 goals per year you lose in Skinner, but replace it with something you think you need more. And that is just comparing Zucker to Skinner. Maybe Skinner's 16-17 minutes of ice time will be mostly replaced with additional ice time for Peterka, Quinn, and Benson, and you might not actually lose ANY offense because it will be replaced by other young guys chipping in even more with more opportunities?

Yeah, but Jerry rice either had the pedigree of being a first round pick ( I think he was taken in the middle of the first round but even then some had him rated as a top-10 prospect) to 'keep him around' for a while, until he had a track record or regular season success.

I'm not saying it is going to work, but I think that is what they are going for. This D will/would look better against that Florida-style-forcecheck as they get older and more experienced. If you want to eventually be a cup winner, I think you have to TRY something like this (different than what everyone else is doing). You are the Buffalo Sabres. You aren't an attractive city for Free agents right now. You aren't going to have the advantage of being in a low-tax area to 'underpay' guys even a little bit. You aren't on even footing in those ways with Teams from Florida, Texas..or other more 'glamorous' destinations. The only time this team was close to sniffing a cup in the past 30 years was when they had, possibly one of the top 5 players in the history of the league playing the most important position (Goalie), and another time when they DID try something different (they put together a young, fast, skilled, SMALL team when the rest of the league was still 'big and physical' and for a window of 2-3 years it worked.) Neither of those times was the team built the same way as all the other top teams. They had to 'zig' when the rest of the league was 'zagging' I just don't think trying to build a 'well-balanced roster' against the rest of the league's 'well balanced rosters'....going head to head with them..and think its going to work. I think you need to try to create a 'mis-match', find a way to build your roster that is different. Again, maybe this isn't the way, but we'll find out. Toronto kinda did this but the opposite. They put a huge focus on creating a 'mismatch' with their forwards, at the expense of assets on D. Its working 'good enough' for them to be good, but not great.

I think that having 4 forwards on the PP is beneficial when you have guys up front that just have SO much more talent than your D-men. I think this became the trend on many teams simply because the 6th-8th forward might have had better puck handing skills or a better shot (even from the point) than the 3rd or 4th D-man on the team. But with the Sabres...with Dahlin, and Power, and Byram, that may not be the case. They might be better off with 2 D-men back there rather than having a forward in that position.

Ok, I might be wrong here, but I'm going to take a shot at what the logic might be... The best way to win a cup for Buffalo might be to do something different than what everyone else is. And that 'different' thing is to be able to control the game from the Blue line out better than anyone. I forgot how long ago it was, but when Canada won Gold in the Olympics a few games ago, they didn't do it by outscoring everyone. They locked the games down. And that was done through the blue line. No matter how much talent the other team had, the puck went in to the Canada zone and the Canadian D-men got to the puck first, had the talent to avoid the forecheck, and make that entry pass out (or skate it out) better than we probably have ever seen. How does that equate to the Sabres? When they MATURE, you put 2 elite D-pairings back there for 70-75% of the game, and you do the same thing at the NHL level. Slightly above average scoring, slightly above average goaltending may be all you need if the other teams simply cannot control the puck in the offensive zone before your 'talented' guys control the puck and get it out. Now, is Byram and elite D-man who can do that? Not yet. BUT He has the talent and Skills to do it...maybe with experience he'll have the decision making to go along with it. The thing is, the Sabres Blue-line isn't there yet, but they have the pure talent to get there. Again, I'm guessing, but that might be one of the plans they are thinking of.

I was going to make a point I thought made a lot of sense, but it actually turns out I was wrong..... What I was going to post......Edmonton really needs to NOT have a terrible start like they did. McDavid and Draisatl were battered, worn out, and injured by the end of the playoffs. Their start was SO bad last year and they had to play 'catch up' for much of the season and wore those 2 out during the regular season.... That is the point I WANTED to make, but looking back at stats, they both had LESS ice time last season than they had in most of the previous few years before last year. McDavid actually averaged UNDER 20 minutes per game over the last 10 games of the regular season.

I do not think they will be bottom 5. I think/hope they will be at least as good as they were in the 2nd half of last season. They were 24-16-2 after January 1, a 98 point pace. However, I cannot discount what you are saying about the teams around them. Ottawa and Detroit have a mix of vets and youth, youth that is getting to the age they should be better. Toronto has their core in their prime. Same for Florida. Montreal is on the way up for sure. Boston is Boston. Even in the other division, New Jersey could/should be one of the best teams in the conference, a major jump. The other teams in the conference that look to be getting better seems a lot more than those getting much worse (Pitt, Wash, MAYBE the Islanders?) It is possible that the team on the ice this year can be better than last year, even considerably better, without showing much, if any, improvement in the standings.

On the surface I'd want to say "not enough" but again, what moves were available in the offseason that he didn't do? Maybe there were some, but it could also be true he had some stuff worked out and the other team/player ended up refusing. Its tough because we really can't know.

I'm fine with Lindy for the next 2 years (actually, may have been ok with 3-4 years of him) In an ideal world, give me the best, up-and-coming coach who is 45 years old or younger. But I have no idea who that is, and would that person come here? All of the other re-treads besides Lindy, I don't think they would be a lot better, so give me Lindy. I never, ever wanted him fired back in the day to begin with. I'm most interested in seeing how the defense, as a unit, plays under Lindy, and how Tage fits into and produces under Lindy. Those to me are the top 2 things that will determine the success of this coming season.

I don't know what to think about getting rid of Skinner. I don't think he was awful, single handedly hurting the team. He didn't really play defense, but again, he didn't go into his own end and turn into a giveaway machine. He was a net-negative in his own end though. Offense? He still scores. But on the other hand, he is getting to the age where he is declining. I guess the reason I don't know how to feel is...whoever his replacement is could/might/probably will score less, but if the Sabres think his replacement in the lineup scores 5-8 less goals, but prevents 8-10 on the defensive end, and does it at a much lower price..that is good? I don't have a strong opinion because him being here, or not being here, doesn't move the needle to much to me in terms of how good they are. I'd LIKE to know the real reason they decided to do this...with specifics.

These preseason games have not been fun to watch. On the other hand, this team is 95% about how good Josh Allen is, and in 2 games we have seen him throw a total of 3 passes.