JohnC

As I stated in a prior post Cozens's hard driving north/south style of play is a style of play that Krueger favors and is attempting to instill. The contrast in play noted in your link between Cozens and Mitts is evident and stark. Although Cozens is much more advanced as a player/prospect that is not to say that Mitts with a longer time frame can't make it as a player. (However, that is not a given.) And those who are advocating for dealing Cozens for a seasoned veteran who can help us more quickly are misguided.

After reading your succinct analysis I think that Krueger has a tendency to favor players who play a more gritty north/south style which would lean toward a player like Cozens over a Dach type of player. Just my sense of the player type that Krueger would be more inclined toward.

Could you and some of the other knowledgeable prospect posters give a comparison between Kirby Dach and Cozens? Are their ceilings in the same range?

The stat that lends me to be optimistic about the upcoming season, whatever format it will be, is the goaltending stat on five on five. That is an indication that if Ullmark continues with his upward trajectory the goaltending could/should ?? be at a level that allows us to stay into contention. Added to that if the PK can be improved with a change in philosophy (more pressure) and simply more basic/intelligent play there are points in the standings that were gratuitously lost year that now should be retrieved. What made the goaltending issue stick out last year was that there simply wasn't enough goal scoring to cushion the goaltending and defensive lapses. If Skinner and Hall can get back to their standard scoring form that in itself will provide enough of a margin to take some pressure off of our goaltending. The addition of Hall and Staal will also reverberate throughout the lines by pushing some of the scorers down to those secondary lines and providing a wider spread of goals. The bottom line is that with internal improvement of the younger players and some key additions this team should be better.

When ROR won the Stanley Cup with St. Louis one of the first texts he got was from Jack congratulating him.

When the coach makes a suggestion that is more of an explicit request over something that has nothing to do with anything that was done wrong then this manufactured scene is a bush league act of exhibiting authority over the players. He was trying to show a hard arse authority over players who are vying to make the team and earn playing time. To me this seems like old school bull shiiit in order to make an impression. Call me unimpressed.

The school situation is very complicated with no simple and cookie cutter formula. On the one hand it might make sense to mostly go to remote learning at the college level because of the powerful socializing urge at the age of the attendees. But at a lower level such as in a grammar school setting it might make sense to allow attendance where the schools are properly ventilated and the desks have more distance between them than usual. And even within this setup the teachers would require additional protection such as a plastic shield and a face mask. There will also have to be adjustments to handling lunch and the cafeteria set up that might result in students eating at their desks rather than the standard cafeteria format. It should be noted that one person who is strongly advocated for getting the younger students back to school is Dr. Fauci. My point here is that although there are no simple solutions within positions that on the surface appear to be diametrically opposed there are aspects to each position that have merit. Stating the obvious: This is complicated and challenging to execute in this virus environment.

I'm referring to the standard public health responses recommended by the health experts to deal with the epidemic. There is an overwhelming consensus as to how to respond to the pandemic and the spread. The basic tool kit is the same for all countries. The best way to limit the consequences (that you listed) of the spread is to follow the basic guidelines that most of the health experts agree on in order to get control of the contagion sooner rather than later.

There is an overwhelming consensus within the experts in the field as to how to best handle the virus. The basics such as wearing a mask, social distancing, washing hands, quarantining the infected etc are the standard approaches all over the world promoted by the experts. When political influences intrude into the public health sphere you have a less than effective response to this deadly virus.

Has the NFL shut down? Is the NBA going to have a season in some form? Didn't MLB have playoff games and have a World Series? The NHL will do the same thing that these other pro sports leagues are doing. They will in some way adapt to the challenging health environment. The regular season will belatedly start and the games played will not be a full slate of games. And the playoff structure and number of teams qualifying for the playoffs still have to be determined after negotiations between the players and owners. They will do what has already been done i.e. do the best they can to adapt to the circumstances.

You make a good point about how their contracts would weigh down a team willing to deal for either one of those players. The Sabres are starting to get a core of younger players who will get elevated contracts with their next contracts. It would be a boondoggle mistake to make a high cost short term acquisition at the expense of losing financial flexibility to keep your own talent in place. If Hall has a prolific year after signing a one year deal then it would foreclose any opportunity to secure him when he becomes a free agent if we add a high cost veteran to this roster now. And if Reinhart continues his steady climb as a player the Sabres would be in a difficult cap situation to sign him. The reality is because of their bountiful contracts both Toews and Kane would be difficult for the Blackhawks to move if they wanted to do so. Those who advocate for a Kane deal are being very short sighted without recognizing the longer term implications.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. When I say high end I'm saying that he is capable of becoming a legitimate second line center. Whether Cozens is enough or not in a proposed deal isn't an issue for me. As I said before it doesn't make sense to me to deal away your best prospect in the system for a 31 year old player. It's not going to happen. As far as losing Hall after next year I'm not worried about that this year. I'm just hope that he regains his elite form for us, and then deal with the retention issue the following year.

I'm not over-correcting. What history doesn't support is dealing away a high draftee who in his first year as a pro in the juniors demonstrated that he is one of the best players/prospects with players in his age group. It would be impossible to say for sure how good he will be but to make the argument that theoretically he can be a bust is a stretch especially after what you have seen of him in his first year after being drafted. I'm very confident that Cozens will not be dealt in a deal for Kane or in any other imagined proposed deal.

Cozens is 18 or 19 yrs old who is expected to be our 2C in a year or two. It would make no sense to deal this player with expected high end potential for a 31 yr. old player who is likely to have a few more years of top tier production. The Chicago Blackhawks have won two or three Stanley Cups with their core players built with high draft picks such as Kane and Toews. So what you are suggesting is not to follow the standard model for long term success and instead go for the expedient short term gain. That's not a path that I want to follow. As far as I am concerned Cozens is an untouchable.

Even if LGR's prediction about Dahlin's scoring projection doesn't come to fruition the hope is that Hall and Skinner can both return to scoring form that will significantly add to the scoring numbers that will give this team more of a margin to work with. And as you wisely point out the most important factor that will make this team a contender is a reasonable level of goaltending. Solid to good goaltending and better PK play (both related to each other) are going to make the difference between having a successful season or another disappointing season.

I would absolutely not trade Cozens in a straight up deal for Kane. Kane is on the downside of his prime. He still is an elite player but how long is that going to last? Maybe the next few years or so. Cozens is starting his career. It might take him another year or so to become an established player. But after that he could be a prime time player for the next decade or so. No thank you. I'm not interested in giving away our future for a short term boost. That's not how you build a serious team and have sustained success.

I wouldn't trade Cozens for Kane straight up even if Chicago took back some of Kane's contract. As you stated this is an internet bravado whose fantasy hockey imagination has run amuck. Because of the age differential I wouldn't even trade Reinhart in a straight up deal.

With a probable compressed scheduled season and the more likely increase in injuries because of it having reserve talent is a good situation to be in. And with there still being an open question whether there is going to be an AHL season or delayed season it wouldn't be surprising if the league authorized expanded rosters or reserve rosters where you can have an unlimited movement of players between the regular and reserve rosters. We now seem to have some depth on the blue and forward lines. That sure is a positive change from having a thin roster where injuries can quickly deplete a roster.

The problem with "no checking" even if there is still physical contact is that the altered style of play hinders player development. The point of getting a lot of playing time in these lower leagues is for the player to develop one's skills to prepare to play at the higher NHL level. This more finesse style of play not only doesn't do that but it also may retard the development of players. As has been discussed in prior posts I don't see how the proposed change in rules has anything to do with the issue of Covid and its transmission.

This is just my guess but when it is further discussed and considered I think that this absurd/nonsensical proposed policy will not go into effect and hockey will go back to being played the regular way. I don't know if fighting is allowed in this league but if it is I suspect that it will be prohibited. Which to me makes sense. With the exponential growth of this pernicious virus the more relevant question is whether hockey in this league and other leagues will be shut down completely. This virus is exploding out of control everywhere. It's a scary situation.

I don't understand resorting to playing hockey without checking as a safety response to limiting Covid risks? Both the NFL and NBA play games which are inherently very physical. The risk for players in whatever sport is that infected people knowingly or not will infect others. That's why there is testing and virus free bubbles that separate players from people who have come from a potentially infected environment. On the issue of Cozens I don't see a scenario where he doesn't make the roster. Even without the Covid situation because of his age he was not going to be able to play in the AHL, and there was little for him to gain playing in the juniors. The model for him to follow is the Kirby Dach model where the Blackhawks started him off as a winger with limited playing time and allowed him to increase his role as he gained experience.

The politicization of medicine and best practices in handling this pandemic is a historical failure to a historical challenge. This current administration has promoted an anti-science attitude toward public health issues that not only has damaged this country's ability to contend with this nemesis but will also have a lingering destructive effect of hindering the country's ability to contain it when the next administration takes control. It's indisputable that compared to the US Canada has done a terrific job handling this plague. What is on display here is the difference between ignorant and intelligent leadership.

What is evident about the ill conceived rushing of Mitts onto a NHL roster is that it not only didn't help the team but it might have set back his development. As of now I can't say for sure whether Mitts will develop or ever develop into an established NHL. I can't even say for sure that his NHL abbreviated early experience will serve him well in the long run or not. Another unknown to me is I'm not sure what his standing is within the organization? Is he a valued asset or is he is a player that the organization dangles in proposed deals? If he would have been handled in the more standard way of starting at the bottom and working your way up the system we would have a better sense of who he is as a player and what his potential could be. I'm not a Botterill basher but in this case it is easy to conclude that he grossly mishandled this young prospect.

As this NHL.com link by Nicholas Cotsonika indicates the form of the season has not yet been fully determined. There are still a lot of issues to work out. https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-could-play-reduced-schedule-for-2020-21-season/c-319607032

With respect to Routsalainen it wouldn't be surprising that he shows very well in training camp and be in consideration for a roster spot. But maybe the best way to handle him is having him play a lot in Rochester in order to acclimate him to the smaller rinks and then move him up like was done with Olofsson. What may complicate that approach is I'm not sure what the plans are for an AHL season. What's evident now compared to the previous few years is that there is more competition for roster spots with no one getting a roster spot because they are entitled to it a la Mitts scenario.