EM88

Longest Sabres losing streaks of all time in their 54 year history: 18 games in 2021. Coach: Ralph Krueger. GM: Kevyn Adams. Owner: Terry Pegula 14 games in 2014-15. Coach: Ted Nolan. GM: Tim Murray. Owner: Terry Pegula 10 games 2014 (2 seasons) Coach: Ted Nolan. GM: Tim Murray. Owner Terry Pegula 9 games current: Coach: Lindy Ruff. GM: Kevyn Adams. Owner Terry Pegula 8 games 2022: Coach: Don Granato. GM Kevyn Adams. Owner, Terry Pegula 8 games in 2019: Coach: Phil Housley. GM Jason Botterill. Owner, Terry Pegula 8 games in 2003: Coach: Lindy Ruff. GM: Darcy Regier. Owner, N/A (NHL ownership, team in bankruptcy) In 54 years, those are the 7 worst losing streaks this team has one gone though, all but one (the one where the team was coming out of bankruptcy) in the last 10-11 or so years. One very common thread among them: 5 different coaches. 4 different GM's. ONE single owner.

It seems like who is part of the problem should also be part of the solution. If a player is underperforming his contract or expectations, that is the problem. The solution is for that player to start to play better. For me I wish I could get 8 votes and put 4 of them on Cozens. It is not about him getting back to his 30 goal production of 2 seasons ago. Its not about worrying about trading him because what if he does better with someone else. He's just a bad player now. He is a poor shooter. He drags down the Powerplay. He is the least discipline penalty killer. He is quite simply the worst decision making forward without the puck I have ever seen. This team is better the less he plays, or with him not on the team with any useful piece coming in return. Waiting and hoping isn't going to change most of those things. This is who he is.

Buddy, you calling other people uptight to justify you saying whatever you want doesn't work with most adults. But hey, if ego needs to make comments like you do to give yourself an emotional victory lap ever now and then, have at it.

And the juvenile sarcasm comes out. I know this is a forum where people are emotional, but c'mon, grow up with that stuff, its really weak.

With regard to your first line bolded above: I think the issue some of us have is, what kind of talent is he? Is he really that talented that the Sabres can not afford to lose him? We, as fans, and as coaches/administrators may have been 'duped' by one season he had where a single season or results masked his shortcomings, and we convinced ourselves he is more talented than he actually is. Talent is Speed. Talent is Agility. Talent is shot accuracy. Talent is size. Talent is effort. But talent is also hockey sense or hockey intelligence. Cozens seems to be lacking hockey sense and hockey intelligence. Not just a little lacking, but rather he is really, really bad at it. The problem with hockey intelligence is, it is the one 'skill' that if it is lacking, it can override all of the others, and in some ways make it worse. The thing that may or may not support this theory even more is he seems to fade in big situations. The number of his goals that are game tying or game winning is one of the lowest on the team. He is awful on the power play. Playing under pressure, It seems players that thrive under pressure are the ones that are the mentall strongest, the ones that think the game the best and do not revert to bad habits. That is exactly the trait Cozens lacks. If Speed and effort are a skill you have, but you do not have the hockey intelligence to be aware of the ice around you, it can turn those positives into negatives. You go way too deep into the offensive zone on a forcheck for example because you want to be aggressive and think your speed will take you there. You throw the body because you want to be physical, but in a situation where you should have turned away because the puck is going back up the ice. Lot of other examples. He just might not 'see' the game well. He might just be lacking the ability to process the game at more than a singular level. Cozens may be a person that when he is out there skating, adrenaline flowing, his mind may shut off in terms of the nuance of hockey and he just becomes that guy who chases the puck like a dog chases a squirrel. The only talent I see him having that over-rides his lack of awareness is that he does get into the tough areas of the ice, he is able to generate his own chances in front of the net to shoot from. But the more I watch and the more I am aware of that, I think many of those shots he gets credit for (Goals expected I think the stat is), come at the expense of chances for his linemates who may be better shooters than he is. Fifth year in the NHL. Turning 24 in a month and a half. Over 300 career NHL games. International play as a pro. Numerous coaches. In the past 5 years he is 2nd only to Tage in terms of ice time among forwards, and he is only behind him by 52 total minutes over 5 years. I do not think it is a learning issue anymore. I think his brain just doesn't process the game. Just like the NFL, you can have a QB that has all the skills: The arm. The mobility. The tenacity. The drive to win. But if that guy doesn't know how to read a defense, or he can't scan the field to see where all of his teamates are as quick as other QBs, that guy is going to be a bust. Does it not seem like that is what is likely happening with Cozens? Many QB's were drafted as high prospects. Some even showed flashes that they could be great. But if they lacked that high level to process the game, eventually they were shown to be busts. Some fans convinced themselves based on a game, a half season, or even a season that wasn't the case. "He did it once he can do it again, he has talent!" Some coaches would even see that talent and play that guy too long. Owners would see the talent and see the money they are paying them and not want to make a change. But in the end, sometime you can't fall back on the excuse that he has talent if that talent is incomplete or just does not translate to the game. Best case scenario he scores 25-30 goals for you, but that won't be every year. But when he does that, he isn't making his linemates better, he is hanging out his wingers and his d-men to dry many times positionally. The likely scenario is he is an 18-24 goal scorer for you while still hanging his wingers and D-men out to dry and being one of the more 'minus' players on your team. He may have raw physical talent, but if he isn't processing the game, that 'mental' talent, the mental ability to read the game that is missing, that is might more than erase his raw skill, and actually make him a worse overall player than someone with 'lesser' physical talents. Cozens now has 6 goals in the last 19 games. He is scoring again, his shooting percentage is back up over the past month. But he still does not look like a good overall hockey player. He does not make his teammates better. He is dragging down the Power play. And most importantly, he is not helping the team win. That to me is not a player who is really talented and is just in a slump. That are signs of a player who just is not, and never has been a complete player that you want on your team long term.

One of my issues with Cozen is that his decision making is poor. So poor that it almost seems like in any situation he makes the incorrect decision on the ice. I am not sure more tenacity changes that. When on the forcheck he often goes in too deep chasing the puck or trying to make a hit in the very moments he should be laying back because whether he makes a hit or not the puck is going out of the zone with a lot of open ice. Adding more tenacity, or aggressiveness to his game just makes that issue worth. A post a few weeks ago someone called him the anti-Patrice Bergeon. Bergon knew when to take the body and when it was better not to do that so he could get back in the play. He may have been the best ever at that. Cozens seems to be the worst ever. Cozens would be a better player with only 2 things I can see. He magically turns into a better shooter. I do not see how that happens. 2nd he makes better decisions in all areas. He doesn't take that shot on the PP for the sake of taking shot when no one is in front. Or in a close game if the Sabres have one forchecker in deep already, he doesn't make himself the 2nd guy in deep where usually the puck goes the other way against you. He has almost zero situational awareness out there. He doesn't read where his teammates are and cover for them. He isn't aware of where all the opposition is, instead only having a singular focus on the puck. And as the Wayne Gretzky saying is, don't go to where the puck is, go to where it is going. I do not think I have ever seen a hockey player in the NHL who goes to where the puck is or has been, and has no skill or sense of where it is going, more than Cozens. Unless someone can make him a more accurate shooter and into his 5th season he starts to 'see' the game differently on the ice, I do not see how he becomes a better player at this point.

The above is a very small sample size, but it speaks to me somehow. When I watch the Sabres powerplay Cozens often times to be more 'in the way' than he helps. And often times he just shoots in a way where it seems like there is near zero chance of it going in, and I wonder if not taking any shot at all would be better than Cozens slapping the puck at the net and it resulting in the puck getting out of the zone. I normally would discount the small sample size. However the trend above supports what many of us see with our own eyes.

The only possible answer to me is coaches see how fast he skates, they know where he was drafted, and see his shot in practice and think Cozens had some raw talent deep down, and those coaches want to be the one to draw it out. They have all tried. At first glance Granato looks to have succeeded in one single season, but what is more likely is that those 31 goals may have been a mirage, a one time occurence that outright masked other problems with his game that have not improved. There is a lot of data up there but it does support how Cozens is a player that likely hurts this team, adding to losses more than he does to wins. He hurts the team actively. He does not produce anymore. I think his mistakes have gone down a slight bit without the puck, but he still makes as many as any other forward so he hurts you that way. He is a skilled player, but he is not a good player. As per what you mentioned above, he also hurts you by, inexplicably, taking opportunities away from someone else, almost anyone else, with talent on the PP, sucking the team's PP production down with him.

And it either a smaller operation and/or something he feels he knows a lot about. It is not just a matter of whether they talk everyday or not. That matters, but it is the substance of the conversation that is much more important.

Some of us don't see a big time upgrade out there. Some of us think that Lindy is still better than most of what is out there. The argument and posts back and forth are from this. You think it is a fact that he's upgradable, and I assume both theoretically and in a practical sense. Many of us do not think both of those things are true. I'm going to agree with you but not put it all on the GM. I still think that the owner has a lot of input even into the roster, and at the very least he has set the budget over the last few years that the hockey department has had to work within. That budget being no spending to the cap until the arena is filled and fans start forking over $ again.

I'm not worried about his body type or his offseason training habits to get bigger and stronger. His shooting accuracy, ability to make his line-mates better and him playing a smarter game than a typical high school hockey player are the issues I want to see him get better at. Some of those he never has been good at, others he had one good year of.

For the entire league or just the Sabres organization?

I get some replies when I say its on Pegula. A lot of asking for proof. A lot of saying its just not true. There may not be the smoking gun to convict Pegula, but there is so much circumstantial evidence from every angle that it convinces me this is more on Pegula than on any coach, any GM any player this organization has had through the recent drought.

No, this is not on Lindy. It starts with Pegula first. Adams and the hockey department 2nd. Players playing to their ability 3rd. Lindy as of now is at the bottom of the list of who is at fault in this organization. The problem is the rot starts at the top. You have the weakest part of the organizations impacting everything below him. The only hope I have this team ever gets good is pure luck, because that is the only way Pegula doesn't mess up everything below him. And everything is below him. Firing Lindy won't solve the issue. His replacement will just be picked by Pegula, or by someone at a different level Pegula picked.

Taking orders and advice from Pegula, which was the condition he was hired upon.

It has been well documented at this point, that there were other teams that did not make those cuts to the same degree the Sabres did. Also, Pegula continued that austerity program even after the Pandemic wound down and many other teams were spending and hiring again. I do not have the quotes and articles at my fingeritps at the moment for this post, but a quick search will show many of them posted on this very forum. Once Pegula soured on Eichel (yes, there are articles and quotes that have been posted on this very forum that show Pegula was not happy with Eichel), he was more than happy to get rid of his salary. Why did Reinhart end up leaving? The Sabres would not pay him long term, pnly giving him short term, short money deals. Mitts was a critical part of this team last year, and he said the Sabres did not even approach him with a long term offer, which the Sabres did not deny either. He was traded in part, probably largely, because they did not want to pay him money long term while well under the cap. They bought out Jeff Skinner and they didn't seem to use that free cap space to spend real money to fill out the roster. That is more on Pegula than the Hockey department. I highly doubt Adams, nor anyone in the hockey department, was thinking they don't want to pay these guys even when they had much cap space. That came from Pegula, not the hockey department. I also remember Pegula saying when he bought the team something like "there is no salary cap on scouting or coaching" or something like that, saying how the team would work to win the cup. If everyone was cutting back on Staff and scouts after the Pandemic, wouldn't a smart business person, a multi-billionaire that wanted his team to win, a smart leader, use that opportunity to grab and sign as many good people as you could when others were letting them go? Pegula did the opposite. He gutted the Sabres scouting and development programs and was certainly not in a hurry to rebuild those programs for a few years. Several of the guys that were purged were picked up by other teams instead of the other way around. This is on Pegula. Most of what his franchise is right now in a negative way, its on Terry Pegula.

I would disagree. Some, I could say several of the moves he has made have been decent. He has some good ones, he has some bad ones, he has some where he had to take the best offer because of the position he was in. For example, You can not pay Reinhart or Mitts when the owner does not want to open the purse so you have to take the best offer. It seems to me that much of the criticism Adams receives that is justified is not that all of his moves are a disaster, but rather he does not make enough moves or that he takes too long to make them. Any trade he does make, that would remedy the above.

I disagree also, but probably for a different reason. Adams may as well make the trade if it is there. Because to me it is not Adams that is the issue. It is this entire front office under Pegula. If Adams were fired and someone was promoted from within, I do not think you get much difference than Adams. If a new GM from the outside were brought in but was left with much, or any of the staff below him such as Karmanos, Forton, and the others and Pegula wants them to continue to all have input, you don't get much difference than Adams. The only way you can get what you are looking for is if Adams is gone, those guys under him are gone, and Pegula allows a restructure of the way the department is run including excusing/excluding his own involvement to its current degree. If Pegula is willing to fire the entire hockey dept and remove himself from those regular meetings fine. If that does not happen then you may as well let Adams keep taking shots at things because nothing else would be different otherwise.

I beg to disagree. Someone just posted a picture where it looks like he quit on a goal the other day. A picture granted. MJD1001 posts frequent breakdowns and videos in GDT's that shows he quits on quite a few plays, is late coming back, and with just a tiny bit more hustle could break up what were actual goals against. He quits on very few plays is narrative on Cozens that I am not sure how it was started, but watching him live at a game and seeing replays of goals when he is on the ice does not support.

A good GM as you described would not have been hired by Pegula, and if he was he would not be long for the job. It is an issue because on the hockey side of things, the last GM got fired for not listening to the owner. Whether it was about roster decisions, not spending money, or firing scouts and staff, both Botts and Pegula himself said he was let go because Pegula was not being listened to. Pegula: "Do as I say or get fired." Botts: "No" Pegula: "You're fired, now I'm hiring someone with the condition they will listen to me." Adams was around. He knows that is how he got his job. He knows its likely that with the team not doing well, he might get fired real quick if he tries to tell Terry where his 'boundries' are. It happened just a few years ago. If you are Adams, its basically this. Let Terry talk to you. Don't set boundries. Take his suggestions. Make him feel he is an important part of hockey and roster decisions. OR, end up like the last guy, that actually happened and you were first-hand witness to it.

I do not care what he does elsewhere if he isn't doing it here. So what if he scored 30 goals on a different team? If he is quitting on plays here, playing terrible defense, and not scoring for you, you don't keep a player sucking up cap space and not helping you just so he doesn't play better someplace else. I do not want to wait a half season, a full season or multiple seasons to see if he can get better again. If you can get something of value back in return, and while doing so remove what has been a negative player so far this year from your roster. Do it.

There are posters on this forum who agree with you. There are others that think that your thoughts are not true and this is mostly Adams fault. I tend to agree with you. Something like 4 gms, 8 coaches, roster turnover year after year, but one owner. It has been discussed in much great detail other place on these pages, but I agree with you and your 2nd and 3rd lines summarize Pegula accurately and succinctly.

I think that there are decent GM's with experience that can be hired and with enough money you could convince to come here. AFter all, if they fail here, it doesn't look that bad because no one succeeds here anymore and if they do succeed, they will be the first to do it in a decade and a half. The issue is Pegula. Will Terry Pegula give the power, control, and the money a new GM would want to make things work? Or will he continue to require that new GM to take the input of a scouting staff and front office that has been a large part of the problem? Or possibly give a new GM the marching orders to win first, fill the building first, and only after that can he start spending to the cap?

Physically and Mentally Quinn looks lost. TWhy is he almost invisible on the ice most nights he plays? And why has he has such a drop off in his play around the net and him going to the net to get shots from the tough spots on the ice? Other young players like Benson and Kulich are getting shots from there and going there. Tyson Kozak has more shots on goal from the front of the net in 2 games than Jack Quinn has all year. Dylan Cozens, who Jack Quinn spends most of his time on the ice with is going to the net and taking shots from there. Even Jack Quinn's hitting is down. From 4.4 hits per 60 last year to 2.19 this year. That is not his game, but to drop 50% is a lot. He seems to be avoiding contact and areas of the ice where he may have contact, unlike no other player on this team including his own self from the last 2 years. The Sabres say he started the year physically healthy, so it must be some kind of mental block he can't get by to do those things. As we approach the 30 game mark of the season and he has played over 20 games himself, it is no longer a small sample size. There are some fans, some posters here who same Jack Quinn will be fine. I hope so. But in light of not just the lack of pure production, but all the declining measurable. The declining secondary stats. The declining deep-dive analytics. With virtually nothing pointing to anything positive. I would like to be reassured as to how or why he'll break out of this.

I agree with you. I looked at the hockey database site and looked at where the Sabres picked, who they selected, and who they could have selected in the next 5picks over the last decade. You know what? They missed on some guys, but more often there wasn't anyone else picked close to where they were and they didn't select all that poorly. They for sure are not the best drafting team in the league, but they are probably middle of the road. I feel the issue is not drafting the wrong players. It is a little bit their development, and a lot of the roster mix, meaning who you pair those guys with when they are breaking into the NHL. I have read many others saying it is OK to have a lot of young players on your team, but you should pair them with vets, preferably good ones. Before you start a year pairing Quinn and Cozens and Peterka (LAST year) and expecting them to excel, how about overpaying for a veteran to put on the line with them? I say overpaying because you might overpay for the production that vet gives you, but its not the production you are paying for. You are paying for some production in addition to him being a settling influence with the young guys.