mjd1001

As with many things, there is a bit of a middle ground and a lot of 'it depends'. Of the players you mentioned, I'm very confident Thompson, Tuch, Peterka, UPL and Dahlin can be part of that core. Barring another Injury, I think Tage gets 50 next year and Dahlin is one of the top 10 D-men in the league. Power I am just as confident with, but I think he's a year or two away. Byrum, Levi, Quinn are hopeful, but too early to tell. Cozens, I'm really down on right now. He is young, he can turn it round, but at the moment, I'm thinking he is closer to a 15-20 goal scorer that is poor defensively and hurts you in your own zone.....rather than a 30 goal scorer that is a good 2 way player. They are playing for the 2nd of those 2 things, if he is the first, thats not a good player you want to rely on at all. I really want him as a winger all year next year, and for the team, management, coaches to not think of him as a player that will be a net positive unless he proves it again.

Cooper probably was a bit of an outlier, and he has proven to be a good coach. But it probably helped him 'ease' into the league when his first full season, he had a Stamkos in the prime years of his career, Kucherov entering the league, a young Alex Killorn who was already a good and productive 2 way player, Hedman with a few years experience approaching norris trophy level play, Martin St. Louis still scoring at a nearly 40 goal per 82 pace, and Ben Bishop giving you Vezina level goaltending (he was a finalist), oh, and you had the 2nd and 3rd place guys in rookie of the year voting (Palat and Johnson) Again, Cooper is a great coach, but he was eased into the league with probably the best scorer at the time (Well, Stamkos and Ovi were neck and neck then), a HOF player still producing and a great leader at the top of your roster, great goaltending, a guy who was turning into the best D-man in the league, and 3 high talented rookies at the bottom or our roster.

At the end of the season, whether you make the playoffs or not, a game you lose by 2 points in October counts the same in the standings as a game you lose by 2 points in March. However, as the season goes on, due to decreasing number of games left, each 2 points 'from that point' matter more in terms of your percentage chance of making the playoffs later in the year as they do earlier...meaning if you look at analytical derived playoff percentage, or simply mathematical calculated chances of making the playoffs, each game matters more to those percentages as you get close to the end of the year. The way I look at is similar to a playoff series...there is less pressure on you going into game 2 down by one game, as there would be into game 6 down by one game. So to answer your question, the stretch later in the season there was/could be viewed as having more pressure to win NOW, each game was more critical to your chances (on a percentage basis) than it was earlier in the year. Its basically my way of looking at it as...when there is much less margin for error, when you can't just 'float' and 'take a day off' because you 'aren't feeling it' how do players respond. I'll admit that in judging a players ultimate worth to a team, you are much better judging the entire season, a larger sample size is almost always better than a smaller one to me. But in theory, those group of games I referenced in my original post, where the ones you could say there was a bit more urgency to and it might tell some people something about who has that 'extra gear' to produce more in that situation.

Looking at the last month-to-month in a half of the season....from early March when the Sabres got back into the playoff race, until they were eliminated...5 players really stepped up and played their best hockey of the season when it mattered: Thompson, Tuch, Peterka, Dahlin, and Power. If you think part of leadership is who played the best when the pressure was on the most (not that it was ALL that much pressure, but for this team yeah), to me it was those 5 guys. Who were no-shows? Skinner, Cozens, Greenway and Krebs (not that you expect the last 2 to be a leader anyway). But those are the guys that really didn't add a thing to help this team get into the playoffs. Again, not sure how much anyone takes those things into effect, but there was a HUGE gap in play between the 2 groups. The first group exceeded their own performance earlier in the year by a lot....the 2nd group (at least their performance) was akin to them running into a corner and hiding.

Yeah, wasn't much in there. Its kinda like the joke about the weatherman in the summer saying the forcast will be partly sunny with a slight chance of rain, with variable winds. Kinda hard to get that one wrong. The Sabres could trade a single prospect, or a few draft picks and pick up a mid level vet....and make a couple assistant coaching firings/changes....and he could come back and say "Exactly what I predicted in my article"

I'll follow the draft when it occurs like always, and read about who the Sabres picked, but this year, I have really zero else for it other than just waching it because that is what a fan of a team does. I know unless they are picking first or 2nd overall, most guys don't make the team, or don't have a game changing impact for years....but in the past that never stopped me from following it, caring about the draft. This year...is like I don' care for some reason. They could trade away their top 3 picks and I'd be like 'oh well'. I'm not quite sure why.

You may have a point, a concussion could do that to you and sometimes it takes a while to come back, like a lot of rest. On the other hand, he wasn't exactly lighting it up on the stat sheet to that point. Through 11 games up to then, he had 3 goals and 7 points...in terms of production a step down from the year before and only a tiny bit better of a rate as he did after the concussion. Maybe an offseason of rest will help. I still would like to see him being a winger next year though.

I was all over Cozens earlier in the year. I think as much as many complained about him, I can't imagine anyone doing more complaining than me (not just the scoring, but his 200 foot game). A couple months ago, I thought he turned the corner, the scoring 'kinda' came back, and his overall game got better too. But now the last 2-3 weeks, I feel he has regressed almost all the way back to earlier in the year. I get he is only 23 years old. He had the talent to score over 30 goals as a 22 year old, so he could/might be a guy that blossoms into a 40 goals scorer when he is 25 or 26. I get that, but right now I think he hurts this team more than he helps. I posted this elsewhere the other day, but since the Sabres beat Vegas 7-2, THAT moment was the moment they were on a roll, had the best chance of getting back into the playoff race. The next few weeks were the make-or-break stretch for this team, who would step up and play well? Since that game, Cozens has 1 regular goal in 20 games (2 counting the empty netter the other night) only 4 assists in those 20 games, is a negative player too. I don't think you could come up with a worse stretch of play from a top 9 forward on your team in a crucial stretch. (for comparison sake, Thompson has played in 19 of those 20 games, has 11 goals, 21 points and is a plus 10) So yeah, I'm legit worried about Cozens again. I'm not going to be shocked if he gets back on track because he still is young, but he's not a good player right now. First thing I do next year if I was coaching is move him off center and get him on the wing. I know you need Centers, but right now, he's not a good one.

The last time I was at an Imax was for Top Gun Maverick. I get the big screen, the more powerful sound. But to me it's kinda like 3d....it's kinda fun to get the 3d effect, or the louder sound, the huge screen for the first few minutes, but I 'adjust' to all of that 5 minutes in and then don't notice much of a difference. Its kinda like what happened with a TV in our house. We don't have so much a 'man cave', but we have an extra room in the house where I keep my computer and have a TV in there, a nice chair and couch, etc. its a small room, but I used to have a 65" TV in there with a surround sound system. Don't ask me why, but when the Tv started 'acting up', I replaced it with a 50 incher and a basic soundbar (no subwoofer even). At first I was like...why did I do this, its not as good, but by 2 days later, I was totally fine with it and didn't even miss the old tv or sound system. As for as Dune, I'm going to give it a try again. I remember years and years ago seeing the original, and wasn't a fan of it. When the remake came out a few years ago, I thought about going to the theater to see it and didn't...then when it was available at home I watched it for about 20 minutes and didn't get into it and never finished it. I think its just the type of thing I have to commit to, so in the next month or so I WILL watch the first one (from a few years ago) all the way through, and then get ready for Dune 2.

Look in the mirror buddy. Personally, the 'gaslighting' you are bringing up, it happens to me in responses a lot more than I dish it out. Some people...like you...I just don't get. Again, look in the mirror a bit before you post, you may see the very thing you are complaining about. Oh, and you must be SO ANXIOUS to get that last paragraph in that you didn't even take the time to understand the very part of my post you are complaining about. I was talking about no trade/movement clauses not for veterans..but for vets who are Good/VERY good players. The very point of my post was you can get the type of vets the sabres have been getting but they need BETTER ones. Adams has brought up HIMSELF (and media following the team) that it IS an issue getting some GOOD players to come here. Let me borrow your own words....You can keep SYING it, but that doesn't make it UNTRUE. Ones that are going to trade significant assets for, and a greater percentage of those have no trade/movement clauses. Oh, yeah, you totally ignored the part where I also included free agents (good ones) who a no movement clause isn't involved, but still have the choice of whether they want to come here or not. I guess you maybe were tripping over your soapbox in the time you should have been putting both of those points together. Its tiring for me having people come at me without even taking an entire post into context, or tell me how to post or not to post based on their preferences, when I routinely get yelled at/swore at in some other posts for simply not laying rose petals at the feet of other posters who disagree with me. You guys got to grow up a bit with attacking other posters and the language you use, unless you want it right back at you. Yes, that applies to me also, I get it, but it applies to everyone else too.

On a non-game related note, a road game in Florida is one of places I have been to. The Arena itself is "OK" but overall not a great experience. Its kinda in the middle-of-no-where. There is a big outlet mall near it, but nothing else near it. Most other cities, when you go to a hockey/basketball arena, you can walk around the city, within a block or two there are restaurants and bars and places to explore. This is more like a football stadium, just an arena surrounded by parking lots. Its just very odd to me, its like they said "South Florida, you want a hockey team, there you go, the arena is far away from where everyone lives, and there is nothing to do around the arena, but there you go".

Adding experience is something that needs to be done, but done in a certain way. You have added experienced guys to this roster over the entire length of the drought, and it hasn't 'worked out'. You added Johnson this year, with a ton of experience (winning) and pedigree. Taylor Hall had experience. Laugh if you will, but Cody Eakin had played for 4 previous teams, was a multiple time high-teen to low 20 goal guy, regarded as responsible defensively, and had almost 600 games of NHL experience (including multiple playoff series). Eric Staal was brought in. There are many other examples. BUT, There is a difference between bringing in a Veteran, a 'decent' Veteran, or an actuall GOOD veteran. Those guys may not have been awful, or they had decent resumes, but they weren't "good". The Sabres have had their share of Vets at the end of their careers just holding on, and a few Vets that were 'decent'. What they haven't had is GOOD vets in the middle/prime of their career. The problem many of us don't want to accept is....if those guys are free agents, Buffalo is WAY down on their list of places to go. If they are available for trade, MOST Of those guys have/may have no trade/no movement clauses and Buffalo is on that list. Wishing the Sabres to get them, or yelling on a message board that this GM is awful becuause he won't get them...that doesn't make it happen. You don't just want veterans for the sake of having veterans. Been there, done that, you aren't getting the 'right' guys. To get the ones that matter, they have to WANT to come here. As much as many don't like to admit it, that is the challenge, and WANTING Adams to just 'get one' isn't going to make it happen. Adams actually WANTING to get one won't make it happen. Firing Adams and bringing in a more experienced GM isn't going to make it happen.

I still think Power has 2 issues right now in his game: -He struggles with confidence. When the Sabres are playing 'lesser' teams or 'non-superstar players' he doesn't have this. But its like...when you put an elite player on the ice, he gets a little awe-struck. Now I know one might say against elite talent on the ice ANYONE will not do as well simply because the players on the other team are that good. But, its a little beyond that. I have noticed that with the puck on his stick carrying it out of the zone, he will carry it a bit more, or look to make a better pass most of the time, but when there is a 'superstar' on the other team on the ice, he will get rid of the puck quicker, or make a really quick, short, sometimes clumsy pass. The key is, that is even when he isn't being pressured. He doesn't seem to want the puck as much in those situations. This is anectdotal, I have no stats to back it up but it seems to happen enough that I notice it. -Physically, he seems to struggle more against smaller/faster players. Austin Matthews is great, but not exactly a small nimble speedster. I don't seem to remember him really getting 'turned inside out' by Matthews over and over. But its the small guys, the quick, darting/water-bug type skaters he doesn't handle much. He has the size, an the reach where I'm sure he can and will learn to denend them better, but he isn't there yet. So again, I dont' have any stats to back this up, but from watching him play, its just the 2 things I think he needs to work on the most...from just observation and my own personal 'eye test'.

Pegula's current thinking seems to be NOT to pay money to make the team good, but rather to wait UNTIL the team is good and THEN pay that money as a reward. Maybe he was always more of a businessman and less of a fan than many of us thought.....however...he seems to be operating the Sabres MORE to make money/not lose money first, and to 'compete on the ice' second. Personally, I'm less upset about the spending on the roster, and more so on the coaching staff, development staff, arena, etc. I'm not saying he is making evergy single decision, but rather he put a 'hard cap' on various parts of the organization (player development, arena upgrades or experience, media and promotions, everything) and just told those parts of the organization....this is all the money you have NO MORE, now make it work within that budget.

I never said Lindy was a genius, I said he is better than he is given credit for. Again, a young team, no legit goalie, his main stars missing games due to injury, and the team got worse when he got fired.

I just posted this in another thread in more detail...but if you want a coaching change I'd bring Lindy back. He led team with probably a younger core than the Sabres to 112 points and a playoff win last year (with no legit goalie) and he had the Devils 'in the mix' this year with still no goalie, and with Hughes, Hirschier, Meier and Hamilton (probably 4 of their top 6 players) missing games due to injury. Since he got fired, the team has done worse. To me that shows, despite some saying he can't coach a younger team, that he CAN adjust and coach a younger team, and his success shows the game has 'not passed him by' I'd want him back for 2 years (or so) and give that a shot. Again, that is IF Granato is let go.

I like that plan I love Lindy. If a change is made, I want him to come back and he is my first choice, but he's not a long term solution. 2-3 year deal for him, and maybe you can get a quality, highly rated assistant by letting him know Lindy isn't going to be here for 10 years, and if the team improves, that assistant (or assistants) will be in the running for the next head coaching job. Last year Lindy took a very young New Jersey team (4 of their top 5 scorers were 24 years old or younger), got them 112 points, and won a playoff series over the Rangers without a legitimate NHL goalie. This year, he was fired after leading the team to 64 points in 61 games, some games without probably his 3 best forwards for periods due to injury (Hughes, Meier and Hischier) and best overall D-man for most of the season (Hamilton). His 'replacement' has gotten 15 points in 18 games, worse than Lindy. When you look at the big picture, Lindy has ties to Buffalo. He took a young team to a great record this year, and since he got fired, the team he coaches has performed worse. If you are making a change, offer it to him.

Greenway and Cozens I am thinking the same way about today. I wasn't happy with their play most of the year. Then in January and February, the started to look a LOT better. I took that as them 'turning the corner' in their play. But recently, they have regressed to their production level of the first half of the season. I took them having a 10-15 game stretch of good/productive play and projected it forward thining that is who they were. My mistake. Bad players or players having bad seasons, even they have good stretches in those seasons. I mistook a handful of games for them actually playing well long term.

As I have said over and over, I'm not on the fire Granato bandwagon. Its not that I am assured he is a great coach, I think he is "OK". But my problem is, put most coaches in the Sabres position, with what I THINK is a somewhat 'meddling' owner, a desire to allow assistant coaches that are good to go elsewhere and replace them with lower priced guys, and an overall lack of Pegula willing to put up assets/dollars to push this franchise forward.....well...I'm not sure any good coaches will want the job, and any other 'average' coaches won't do much better with the assets to back them up. You could change coaches and they might improve next year, but that would be more because the team is 'maturing' and 'aging up' if it does happen. Before a head coach or GM change happens, I want to see a greater comittement from ownership to support the franchise in other ways (assistant coaches, development, etc.)

Since the last time the Sabres made the playoffs: 7 head coaches. 18 first round draft picks. 10 top-10 picks, 4 1st or 2nd overall picks. 4 general managers. 6 or 7 head coaches of their AHL affiliate (development). I don't even know how many changes in upper management (Ted Black, Pat Lafontaine, Kim Pegula...others? I don't even know anymore) A decaying arena. 20+, maybe more, trades involving all stars or former first round players going in or going out. ONE owner. Zero playoffs in 13 years. After Pegula said the reason for the franchise existing was to win the Cup, The team has not started a single season with him as an owner even making the playoffs. Probably the longest/worst stretch of lack of success in all of modern professional sports. One owner, Overseeing it all. I'd start with the owner. But that is the one position that hasn't changed and is least likely to change.

The cost of housing. Our daughter finally has a full time, decent (not great) but decent job, and is saving money looking for a house. There is zero chance of her buying on on her own. We are willing to help her a bit with it, but again, wow. A 30 year old (or slightly newer) 2 or 3 bedroom in the suburbs within a few miles of us...prices have gone up more than 50% in the last couple of years. We own a house in Florida we rent out (probably selling it soon, we have zero desire to return to Florida) but I have noticed something in the area where we own it and read about this other places too. People in CONCEPT want more affordable housing for young people...but in order for that to happen, new supply has to be brought onto the market, or smaller/cheaper unites need to be built. So what is the problem with that? I have noticed that anytime a proposal is brought up to do that in a county or town, Home-owning senior citizens show up and make sure that doesn't get passed. ANYTHING that lowers (or even prevents the continued increase in home prices) also means when they look at the value of THEIR home on Zillow, the number doesn't go up as much, and they don't like that. In Florida there was a proposal to build a new subdivision about 10 miles from our house down there that would have smaller, more 'basic" houses built. Apparently at the meeting for it, 50+ people showed up to speak against it (mostly senior citizens) saying they don't want it because it would impact their home values. Up here by us, there is an apartment complex recently built and they want to make apartments in it that are almost 'house sized' (over 1200 sq feet, 3 bedroom apartments) and again, a bunch of people showed up saying no to it...only studios or one bedrooms...because if you make 3 bedroom apartments available for rent, that is less demand for housing and their home values will go down. You can't have 'affordable' housing if every time a proposal comes up for that you have people show up not wanting it, because they want to see the 'paper' value of their current homes keep going up. I have another complaint today, this one a bit closer to hockey and being a fan of the Sabres. Lance Lysowski from the Buffalo news. He put a tweet out there that someone disagreed with. A response was made to him, nothing confrontational at all. He was supporting Cozens, and one person replied that last year was an outlier year for cozens. A 2nd person responded, again, nothing confrontational at all, listed some stats showing his shooting percentages showing that last year was much higher than any of the other 3 years of his career, including this year. Nothing was said criticizing Lysowski, no shade was thrown at him in any way. His reply? You all an enjoy living under your dark cloud (or something like that) and then said he was done and was muting the conversaton or the responders. Then he deleted his original post. You are a member of the media. You are posting things on twitter. The people responding to you were not mean in any way, and just gave a different opinion and backed it up with stats. To be that closed minded and thin skinned of someoen disagreeing with you...over a twitter post...and them not confroting you but just throwing some stats out there...wow. You shouldn't hold positions and post if you can't take a someone who has a different opinion especially when they use stats to explain it.

Many know, I'm not in favor of firing Granato, is he perfect, no, but I think this season's failure is more on the players than the coach. However, if you are going to change coaches..... I think you need the GM AND the owner present for interviews, and if you want a top coach like Brind'Amour, you are going to have to tell him...here is your 4-5 year deal....YOU are going to have input into the roster AND the direction of the roster. Basically, something I don't think Pegula would want...but if the GM and Coach (or in this case the coach) says...I don't want this guy...or I want to draft this guy...he gets basically the final say. Sure, the owner should be informed of moves but not involved in decision making. It has to be more of.....letting the owner know what the moves being made are, and explain to him WHY they are being made, thats it. We can't have Pegula wanting Leino...or sitting on on personal meetings, asking questions about day-to-day things. Its not a good work environment for have the owner 'sitting in' on coaching meetings, personal meetings, giving his input and expecting things to be run by him. Sure, Pegula has the RIGHT to do that, but you want to attract a new coach, not an unknown, a minor league guy, or an older guy on his 4th chance.....then that new guy needs to know him and the GM run the franchise...the owner will be informed, but not involved. If Terry doesn't want that then fine, but then he, and all of us, have to accept the consequences of that.

There isn't anything wrong with that article, but its almost like someone took AI and had them scan this entire site of every post, and then write an article that consolidated common opinions and stats brought up into an aritlce. Great article for the casual fans and a great summary of the season, but most of what was in there was discussed over and over on this forum.

I'd just expect a little more from Cozens, seeing how he had 30 last year, and he's been a full time player for 3+ years now. Plus you do have numerous young players doing well in a variety of circumstances....Wyatt Johnson is playing a big role on Dallas fighting for the presidents trophy. Locan Cooley and Dylan Guenther aren't playing for anything at all in Arizona. Lucas Raymond is in the middle of a playoff push just like the Sabres. Those are just 4 guys I found in looking at stats for 30 seconds.....all of them younger than Cozens, all of them putting in goals at (or close to) a goal every other game over the same year end stretch drive. I am very hard on Cozens, but after last year, and him getting paid $7m+, I really REALLY want more production from him.

Agree. I guess you can see if Krebs 'magically changes' over the offseason and becomes a guy who can produce 10-15 goals and 40 points next year. I'm not thinking that can happen though, but it might? But even if it does, I don't think you want to assume that will happen. Bring in a veteran guy that has a history of at least decent production. If Krebs transforms into something special, you can make room for him,but you need an additional legit center in here that isn't currently on the roster or in Rochester.