Murray, Prow and MacInnis assigned to Amerks

[Thorner]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I disagree. There is a huge gap between Mittelstadt and Eakin, Tuch and Murray, Jokiharju and Fitzgerald and Anderson and Dell.

 

Also, when you have 10 'real' NHLers, losing 4 or 5 of them affects you more than when you have 16 or 18.

Exactly. Injuries are affecting us more because we were in a lesser spot to withstand them relative to the rest of the league. It's the key distinction. It's why it's not a point for optimism, some sort of avenue of improvement we can key on for next year - the way injuries work isn't going to change. It only represents an area for improvement if KA actively goes out and improves team depth. 

But saying a team can be better if said team goes out and adds better players isn't a revelation - every team is literally in that boat. 

[jsb]

I feel like I'm in a rock song loop here with you 2 playing Billy Preston's "Will It Go Round In Circles" again. @dudacek is a Rod Stewart "Reason to Believe" kind of optimist and @Thorny is a R.E.M. "Everybody Hurts" kind of dour guy. What this team lacks is organizational depth to overcome injuries, sickness, etc.....

The optimistic outlook is we're finally starting to build depth not with NHL ready guys but players that are/will be better skilled eventually and the I'm sick and tired of losing attitude (which we all endure/feel) that everybody sucks and nothing in the short term will get better because the young guys won't make it better for awhile. One of the problems isn't that we don't have a true #1C but we don't have a true #1 Winger as well. Does Panarin, Kucherov, Kane need a #1C or are they still #1 wingers that need someone to build chemistry to succeed. Our #1 talent level probably only includes Dahlin and really right now nobody else.

[Thorner]

The Sabres are where they *should* be this season, in the standings, based on the roster they assembled. If we run it back, we aren't going to make up ground next year simply due to health - it just doesn't work like that. It's not bad luck. It's something that needs to be expected. 

That we couldn't withstand the injuries should tell the GM he's in need of roster supplementation. I understand that is coming next year in the form of rookies - I am of the opinion, due to how far down the standings we are, that it's not going to be enough. I really wanted to see a team this year performing better - to the extent I really had some optimism that the kids coming could represent a tipping point. 

I don't think we are near a tipping point yet, based on what I've seen committed to visual this year. Still some runway left, though. It's why I watch the games. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, jsb said:

I feel like I'm in a rock song loop here with you 2 playing Billy Preston's "Will It Go Round In Circles" again. @dudacek is a Rod Stewart "Reason to Believe" kind of optimist and @Thorny is a R.E.M. "Everybody Hurts" kind of dour guy. What this team lacks is organizational depth to overcome injuries, sickness, etc.....

The optimistic outlook is we're finally starting to build depth not with NHL ready guys but players that are/will be better skilled eventually and the I'm sick and tired of losing attitude (which we all endure/feel) that everybody sucks and nothing in the short term will get better because the young guys won't make it better for awhile. One of the problems isn't that we don't have a true #1C but we don't have a true #1 Winger as well. Does Panarin, Kucherov, Kane need a #1C or are they still #1 wingers that need someone to build chemistry to succeed. Our #1 talent level probably only includes Dahlin and really right now nobody else.

Every whisper, of every waking hour
I'm choosing my confessions
Trying to keep an eye on you
Like a hurt, lost and blinded fool, fool
Oh no I've said too much
I set it up

[Dreams Burn Down]

Meh. 😒  MacInnis and Prow are not NHL caliber right now.  Murray only gets a slightly higher grade because of his willingness to show some toughness, but that was missing last night.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Dreams Burn Down

[dudacek]

@Thorny, what you aren't acknowledging is that I'm not talking about 2 players right now, I'm talking about 10 players next year. And those players have not been missing a handful of games. With the exception of Jokiharju's 1/2-season, they've been absent virtually the entire season.

I did a quick scan of the division and found 2 teams with key players missing for the majority of the season: Kucherov and Price. One team has collapsed, the other is the Stanley Cup champ. Boston and Toronto can't get their "two players of choice" back the same way the Sabres would because they haven't been missing them the same way.

If your argument is we will be a better team with those 10 players in the lineup but not enough to be anything more than the bottom 5 team we are now, that's a fair argument. I disagree, but I understand it.

I think there is an avenue of improvement by plugging the majority of those 10 players into the majority of next year's games. Some won't be upgrades over the guys they replace, some might be 10 per cent upgrades.

An average of 2 per cent per player over 10 players, to my mind, could add up to a significant improvement.

Edited January 7, 2022 by dudacek

[LGR4GM]

I would like to point out that Owen Power will be about a 50% upgrade over any LHD not named Dahlin the 2nd he set foots on NHL ice. 

[Thorner]

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

@Thorny, what you aren't acknowledging is that I'm not talking about 2 players right now, I'm talking about 10 players next year. And those players have not been missing a handful of games. With the exception of Jokiharju's 1/2-season, they've been absent virtually the entire season.

I did a quick scan of the division and found 2 teams with key players missing for the majority of the season: Kucherov and Price. One team has collapsed, the other is the Stanley Cup champ. Boston and Toronto can't get their "two players of choice" back the same way the Sabres would because they haven't been missing them the same way.

If your argument is we will be a better team with those 10 players in the lineup but not enough to be anything more than the bottom 5 team we are now, that's a fair argument. I disagree, but I understand it.

I think there is an avenue of improvement by plugging the majority of those 10 players into the majority of next year's games. Some won't be upgrades over the guys they replace, some might be 10 per cent upgrades.

An average of 2 per cent per player over 10 players, to my mind, could add up to a significant improvement.

I can acknowledge the 10 guys, but I'm also aware most teams undergo similar turnover in most other years. I can't remember who posted it a little while back, but changing out a third or so of your roster *every* year is really quite common. Maybe the Sabres turn over a couple more guys than normal?

My argument isn't so much that we don't have talent coming - we do. It's that it *isn't* being added to a team that is being misrepresented by it's point total this year. The Sabres are where they *should* be in the standings this year - that they didn't have the depth to withstand injury, something every team is tested on, every year, is not a mark in Adams' favour. They can't have expected better, is my point. They do not have an absurd amount of talent missing relative to other teams, one can't reasonably expect Craig Anderson to amount to more than he has. It was a bad bet to begin with. There's no credit there. 

If we start the projection for next year out from a ~ 60 point, bottom 5 (soon to be bottom 4) roster, I think we are more/less on the same playing field here. We may differ on how much improvement we'll see, next season, by Adams doing what everyone wants him to do - which is sit on his hands and draft players.

You may just see more improvement coming from the infusion of youth than I do. Or, you may not - maybe I see the same and I just see the starting point as much lower. All I can do is keep consistency of argument, it's what matters to me - I've said all along that I was NOT ok with a "this season wasn't about winning anyway" attitude, and I know you are familiar with my posts. Nothing has changed for me, I'm not skewing anything to fit my stance: I wanted to see the team perform better *this* season. For me, if we were seeing more promise from the young players and team we have now, if Adams had added further supplementation, whatever the reason may be - I'd be a lot more confident the guys we have coming could serve to bridge the gap. 

To me, things look a lot further away than next season. 

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I would like to point out that Owen Power will be about a 50% upgrade over any LHD not named Dahlin the 2nd he set foots on NHL ice. 

And it's a good point. Owen Power is the one guy who gives me hesitation in predicting little improvement next season should Adams more/less sit on his hands. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

I'm not making excuses or suggesting the following players are lifesavers, but we haven't seen anything close to next year's roster together in Buffalo this year:

The Sabres have played 34 games

• Luukkonen 8
• Anderson 6
• Jokiharju 18
• Tuch 3
• Mittelstadt 4
• Power 0
• Samuelsson 0
• Krebs 3
• Quinn 0
• Peterka 2

We've been missing our projected 1G, 1C, 1RW, and 1RD for most of the year, as well as watching our 1LW struggle with an injury that has robbed him of his shot.

And we've got 5 prospects who are tearing it up at lower levels and look very close. We have more talent than we've seen.

 

So your saying the tank is working.

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I can acknowledge the 10 guys, but I'm also aware most teams undergo similar turnover in most other years. I can't remember who posted it a little while back, but changing out a third or so of your roster *every* year is really quite common. Maybe the Sabres turn over a couple more guys than normal?

My argument isn't so much that we don't have talent coming - we do. It's that it *isn't* being added to a team that is being misrepresented by it's point total this year. The Sabres are where they *should* be in the standings this year - that they didn't have the depth to withstand injury, something every team is tested on, every year, is not a mark in Adams' favour. They can't have expected better, is my point. They do not have an absurd amount of talent missing relative to other teams, one can't reasonably expect Craig Anderson to amount to more than he has. It was a bad bet to begin with. There's no credit there. 

If we start the projection for next year out from a ~ 60 point, bottom 5 (soon to be bottom 4) roster, I think we are more/less on the same playing field here. We may differ on how much improvement we'll see, next season, by Adams doing what everyone wants him to do - which is sit on his hands and draft players.

You may just see more improvement coming from the infusion of youth than I do. Or, you may not - maybe I see the same and I just see the starting point as much lower. All I can do is keep consistency of argument, it's what matters to me - I've said all along that I was NOT ok with a "this season wasn't about winning anyway" attitude, and I know you are familiar with my posts. Nothing has changed for me, I'm not skewing anything to fit my stance: I wanted to see the team perform better *this* season. For me, if we were seeing more promise from the young players and team we have now, if Adams had added further supplementation, whatever the reason may be - I'd be a lot more confident the guys we have coming could serve to bridge the gap. 

To me, things look a lot further away than next season. 

And it's a good point. Owen Power is the one guy who gives me hesitation in predicting little improvement next season should Adams more/less sit on his hands. 

Just watched a video on Power and the amount of growth from watching his draft tape to what he has done this year... everything he needed to work and improve is better. It is like watching Jack Quinn this year versus his draft year. 

It's like JJ Peterka last year to this year. Idk what to do when players actually grow and develop because we haven't seen that since... Pominville? 

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

And it's a good point. Owen Power is the one guy who gives me hesitation in predicting little improvement next season should Adams more/less sit on his hands. 

What about Mittelstadt and Tuch scoring 40 instead of Murray and Eakin's 15?

What about Luukkonen's .915 SP over Tokarksi's .900?

Krebs, Quinn and Peterka's talent in depth roles, or more over Bjork, Hayden and Jankowski?

Samuelsson's physicality over Butcher's butchering?

Cozens? Dahlin?

I see so many opportunities for in-house improvement.

[PromoTheRobot]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

I don't think it's meaningless, at all. Unless we think the Sabres have lost more talent relative to the rest of the league due to injury, I'd say we see nearly every team struggling with losing players to covid. Looking at each team, yes, most have lost key players for a significant amount of time. 

The Sabres aren't worse off - they are in the same boat as everyone else. We probably feel it more than other teams because of our lack of depth - but that isn't a positive. Lack of depth will *always* be a death knell for team, covid or not - the injury bug always comes around, as we've seen in every other year. 

Also, it wasn't a blanket dismissal, I went on to make several other points in that post 

The Sabres are easily the team least able to deal with disruption. They are building from rock bottom. Every time they start to find a rhythm, someone is injured or put on COVID protocol. That is not the same thing as a deep rostered playoff contender losing a couple of third or fourth-line grunts. So to use a blanket statement like you are is disingenuous.

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

What about Mittelstadt and Tuch scoring 40 instead of Murray and Eakin's 15?

What about Luukkonen's .915 SP over Tokarksi's .900?

Krebs, Quinn and Peterka's talent in depth roles, or more over Bjork, Hayden and Jankowski?

Samuelsson's physicality over Butcher's butchering?

Cozens? Dahlin?

I see so many opportunities for in-house improvement.

Will the Sabres benefit from inside improvement more than some other teams?  I could see it. Without added depth, they'll almost certainly lose a portion of that increased benefit due to injury, once it has it's affect on our team next year, as it will with all others. Would need to see some outside addition to the roster this summer from KA to prevent that portion of loss. We will also lose a portion of that benefit due to other teams also having an influx of talent. Will we lose the full benefit? No, I think overall we have more talent on the way than average, but I am perhaps biased towards the Sabres - can't claim to be as familiar with the prospects units of all the other teams. Owen Power seemingly presents a notable exception, which is encouraging. 

Again, one need only look at the general statistical WAR of players across the NHL to see we are looking at a near-insurmountable gap, over one year, should we be adding said young players to a 60 point team. What's the expectation? That brining back the same team plus rooks nets us 70-75 points? It is uncommon for a team to improve that much year over year, but I could see it being possible. 

If the conversation is, Jack Quinn, JJ Peterka, and Owen Power are going to come in year 1 and with the addition of one of Casey or Tuch (one will be injured, yes, we can assume a non-healthy lineup) we'll be fighting for a playoff spot - I'm not there. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

The Sabres are easily the team least able to deal with disruption. They are building from rock bottom. Every time they start to find a rhythm, someone is injured or put on COVID protocol. That is not the same thing as a deep rostered playoff contender losing a couple of third or fourth-line grunts. So to use a blanket statement like you are is disingenuous.

I agree with the first bold. 

As for the second, I don't think you are understanding my argument. 

My entire point is that the Sabres being "less able" to deal with disruption isn't something that should be construed as "bad luck" or a potential area for improvement, heading into next season. We will continue to be hampered by injuries to a greater extent than other teams if we continue to have a lack of depth relative to other teams. 

It's a self-made failing. The roster with a lack of depth is the roster we chose to assemble.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[Thorner]

27 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Just watched a video on Power and the amount of growth from watching his draft tape to what he has done this year... everything he needed to work and improve is better. It is like watching Jack Quinn this year versus his draft year. 

It's like JJ Peterka last year to this year. Idk what to do when players actually grow and develop because we haven't seen that since... Pominville? 

I like how people pretend Eichel didn't develop. He had a more linear upward trajectory than any Sabre in my memory. Reinhart also had a strong, strong development curve. 

Eichel went from a 56 point scorer as an 18 year old rookie to a player who finished 11th in the ENTIRE LEAGUE in points per game at 19 lol. 

I guess that doesn't count though because it was, as they say,

"All part of the plan" - The Joker. 

It's all framed through expectation. 

- - - 

The advanced metrics identify Eichel-the-rookie as contributing more negatively to possession than positively - and in a mere 4 years he was top 10 in league MVP voting. Development. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[PromoTheRobot]

23 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I agree with the first bold. 

As for the second, I don't think you are understanding my argument. 

My entire point is that the Sabres being "less able" to deal with disruption isn't something that should be construed as "bad luck" or a potential area for improvement, heading into next season. We will continue to be hampered by injuries to a greater extent than other teams if we continue to have a lack of depth relative to other teams. 

It's a self-made failing. The roster with a lack of depth is the roster we chose to assemble.

You say that as if we had our choice of superstars to add. The roster is who we have and who we drafted and traded for. 

[Thorner]

6 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

You say that as if we had our choice of superstars to add. The roster is who we have and who we drafted and traded for. 

It's okay to be of the position that says, "Not only could we not have expected better on-ice this season, from the players we have, our GM also had no choice in assembling said roster the way he did, and taking the pathway he did." - it just doesn't leave any room for discussion. We are simply witnessing justified inevitability, then. 

I do know that certain posters I may or may not be conversing with right now were posting screengrabs of the Sabres' position in the standings this past October after a few games, so I have indeed been under the impression taking a stance on the actual results may have merit, and/or bear discussion. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

39 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I like how people pretend Eichel didn't develop. He had a more linear upward trajectory than any Sabre in my memory. Reinhart also had a strong, strong development curve. 

Eichel went from a 56 point scorer as an 18 year old rookie to a player who finished 11th in the ENTIRE LEAGUE in points per game at 19 lol. 

I guess that doesn't count though because it was, as they say,

"All part of the plan" - The Joker. 

It's all framed through expectation. 

- - - 

The advanced metrics identify Eichel-the-rookie as contributing more negatively to possession than positively - and in a mere 4 years he was top 10 in league MVP voting. Development. 

seems needlessly aggressive but sure Eichel and Reinhart both grew and developed. Risto didn't. Nylander didn't. Lots of 2nd rounders didn't. 

[North Buffalo]

2 hours ago, jsb said:

I feel like I'm in a rock song loop here with you 2 playing Billy Preston's "Will It Go Round In Circles" again. @dudacek is a Rod Stewart "Reason to Believe" kind of optimist and @Thorny is a R.E.M. "Everybody Hurts" kind of dour guy. What this team lacks is organizational depth to overcome injuries, sickness, etc.....

The optimistic outlook is we're finally starting to build depth not with NHL ready guys but players that are/will be better skilled eventually and the I'm sick and tired of losing attitude (which we all endure/feel) that everybody sucks and nothing in the short term will get better because the young guys won't make it better for awhile. One of the problems isn't that we don't have a true #1C but we don't have a true #1 Winger as well. Does Panarin, Kucherov, Kane need a #1C or are they still #1 wingers that need someone to build chemistry to succeed. Our #1 talent level probably only includes Dahlin and really right now nobody else.

Better yet "Journey's Wheel in the Sky".. keeps on turning... Dont know where Ill be tomorrow.

Edited January 7, 2022 by North Buffalo

[Thorner]

38 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

seems needlessly aggressive but sure Eichel and Reinhart both grew and developed. Risto didn't. Nylander didn't. Lots of 2nd rounders didn't. 

whoops sorry it wasn't supposed to read aggressively, LGR. my apologies. 

- - - 

I legitimately believe people forget about the development Eichel underwent because it was, you know, even "expected" is probably the wrong word. It was pre-ordained. 

But it still did happen. Even if it wasn't to a generational level. 

Not saying you, specifically. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

My point is that there's little gap between our "projected" 1st liners and our "projected" 3rd liners. I don't care if it's Casey Mittelstadt this year or Zemgus Girgensons during the tank years - those guys being projected for a role doesn't mean they are actually of that quality. We didn't lose a 1C, we lost Casey Mittelstadt. 

Exactly. This is what I've been trying to say here and there in various threads. The body of work for players like Mitts is really small and they are far from guaranteed to be top line players. We have many potentially good players and prospects, but there are very few players who you can definitively say are a lock and are going to be cornerstones moving forward. 

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

 or Zemgus Girgensons during the tank years 

Wait what? These aren't the tank years??? 🙂

 

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Exactly. This is what I've been trying to say here and there in various threads. The body of work for players like Mitts is really small and they are far from guaranteed to be top line players. We have many potentially good players and prospects, but there are very few players who you can definitively say are a lock and are going to be cornerstones moving forward. 

Wait what? These aren't the tank years??? 🙂

 

I've been thinking we are in the Wonder Years. 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Will the Sabres benefit from inside improvement more than some other teams?  I could see it. Without added depth, they'll almost certainly lose a portion of that increased benefit due to injury, once it has it's affect on our team next year, as it will with all others. Would need to see some outside addition to the roster this summer from KA to prevent that portion of loss. We will also lose a portion of that benefit due to other teams also having an influx of talent. Will we lose the full benefit? No, I think overall we have more talent on the way than average, but I am perhaps biased towards the Sabres - can't claim to be as familiar with the prospects units of all the other teams. Owen Power seemingly presents a notable exception, which is encouraging. 

Again, one need only look at the general statistical WAR of players across the NHL to see we are looking at a near-insurmountable gap, over one year, should we be adding said young players to a 60 point team. What's the expectation? That brining back the same team plus rooks nets us 70-75 points? It is uncommon for a team to improve that much year over year, but I could see it being possible. 

If the conversation is, Jack Quinn, JJ Peterka, and Owen Power are going to come in year 1 and with the addition of one of Casey or Tuch (one will be injured, yes, we can assume a non-healthy lineup) we'll be fighting for a playoff spot - I'm not there. 

I don't know why you keep coming back to this.

All teams deal with injury troubles. Most teams do not have multiple key players hurt the entire year.

It's not the same thing.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I don't know why you keep coming back to this.

All teams deal with injury troubles. Most teams do not have multiple key players hurt the entire year.

It's not the same thing.

And I don't know why you don't understand why I keep doing it.

We don't have key players.

We have a roster literally designed with the idea of "next man up" being strictly viable. People have been saying in threads all year our roster is ideally structured for exactly that. Because it's true. Put someone in, take someone out. Put a couple in, take a couple out - it's not going to matter in the standings. The gap from Mittelstadt and Tuch to Eakin and whoever, when compared to the gaps other teams have, OR EVEN DON'T HAVE, when looking at their injury or covid situations, are but a drop of urine in the ocean. 

With the exception of Dahlin, the rest is mostly interchangeable. 

- - - 

We could add Jack Eichel to this roster and we'd be at the bottom of the league. How do I know? Cause I freaking saw it already!

We aren't adding that kind of talent to this roster if we somehow could retroactively grant the team a clean bill of health for the full year. Add every single player that's been hurt and they don't add as much value as replacing Krebs with Eichel would. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Thorny

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

And I don't know why you don't understand why I keep doing it.

We don't have key players.

We have a roster literally designed with the idea of "next man up" being strictly viable. People have been saying in threads all year our roster is ideally structured for exactly that. Because it's true. Put someone in, take someone out. Put a couple in, take a couple out - it's not going to matter in the standings. The gap from Mittelstadt and Tuch to Eakin and whoever, when compared to the gaps other teams have, OR EVEN DON'T HAVE, when looking at their injury or covid situations, are but a drop of urine in the ocean. 

I don't know what you've been watching if you aren't seeing a significant drop-off when Prow is in for Bryson or Dell for Anderson, or an obvious boost when Jokiharju came in for Butcher or Tuch for Bjork.

Interchangeable is Bjork for Caggiula

Edited January 7, 2022 by dudacek