Around The NHL 2022-23 Regular Season

[Thorner]

20 minutes ago, JohnC said:

My time frame is different from yours. The KA era has absolutely nothing to do with the era/s before his elevation and tenure as a GM. I understand the frustrations of many here. But my viewpoint, compared to those who constantly compare this team to teams from era in the past, is that he is taking the right approach. In fact, I would say that his rebuild is going faster than I thought it would take. I'm confident that you have another view. Nostalgia can be entrapping. 

But if he doesn’t make the playoffs next year, it’s going slower than you thought, right? 

[Marvin]

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

My time frame is different from yours. The KA era has absolutely nothing to do with the era/s before his elevation and tenure as a GM. I understand the frustrations of many here. But my viewpoint, compared to those who constantly compare this team to teams from era in the past, is that he is taking the right approach. In fact, I would say that his rebuild is going faster than I thought it would take. I'm confident that you have another view. Nostalgia can be entrapping. 

I will plead guilty to some of this.  The Sabres went from expansion team to playoff team in 3 years.  They were one of the best teams in the league from 1975-84 virtually year-in and year-out.  Our top 4 defencemen in this era had great positional play.  Once we got Edwards and Sauve, we had good to great goaltending almost every year until Ryan Miller was traded outside of the bankruptcy.  Until the tank, the Sabres had a winning record against virtually every team in the league except Philadelphia and Edmonton.  I EXPECT quality from this franchise.  The last decade plus are more painful to me than others because of my expectations.  This season is doubly frustrating because the Sabres are weak where I used to take it almost for granted that they would be strong.  And the lack of goaltending is very painful because the Sabres weak goaltending probably cost them a Cup in 1975.  (I can re-iterate my evidence if you want.)  Honestly, it has not been easy keeping my head level this season.

[mjd1001]

45 minutes ago, Marvin said:

I will plead guilty to some of this.  The Sabres went from expansion team to playoff team in 3 years.  They were one of the best teams in the league from 1975-84 virtually year-in and year-out.  Our top 4 defencemen in this era had great positional play.  Once we got Edwards and Sauve, we had good to great goaltending almost every year until Ryan Miller was traded outside of the bankruptcy.  Until the tank, the Sabres had a winning record against virtually every team in the league except Philadelphia and Edmonton.  I EXPECT quality from this franchise.  The last decade plus are more painful to me than others because of my expectations. 

I became a Sabres fan as a really young kid (probably before even a Bills fan) in the 1980's and I just assumed they were always good enough to be in the playoffs.  I never even considered the team missing the playoffs. (even though it happend 2 times, that was 2 playoff misses and 19 playoff appearances over 21 seasons)

As a one time expansivion franchise,  'small market' franchise, going through bankruptcy, the Sabres played 40 seasons under those conditions: 

-29 out of 40 seasons making the playoffs. 

-33 of those 40 seasons having 50% or more of all available points in a season. 

-11 of those 40 seasons having at least 60% of available points (over a 100 point pace in todays 82 game schedule) and that was before the 'loser point' was available in over time.

-Longest streak without playoffs was 3 in a row.

-Yes, it was easier to make the playoffs back then, but had a streak of 11 seaons in a row and one of 8 seasons in a row of playoff appearances, 

 

Since the 2011-2012 season (Pegula's first full season as ownership), where the sole existence for the franchise was to win a cup, where money would not longer be an issue to acheiving that goal:

-If they don't make it this year, it will be 0 out of 12 seasons of missing the playoffs.

-This season might be the 2nd one with over 50% of the points, if they hold on to that this year.

-0 seaons with over 60% of avialable points. Not even close one time to this.

-12 years in a row, perfect record of not making the playoffs.

-7 different coaches in those 12 seasons.   Each one with a losing record in the last 12 years. 4 different GM's  2 first overall picks, 2 2nd overall picks. They made 10 selections in the top 10 in the draft.

 

We have gone over and over whether it is Terry's fault for the Sabres problems. Most say yes, some say no, some say as an owner he needed  a learning curve, etc, etc.  What stands out is they actually were one of the top franchises in winning percentages and playoff appearances while operating under that 'low budget'.....and the moment that we all rejoiced that a 'rich owner' was taking over the team and saying money would be spent to acheive the goals, we have probably seen the worse stretch by any team in the history of professional American sports that reached this length. (modern times, for myself speaking in the last 40 or so years.)

Edited March 21, 2023 by mjd1001

[JohnC]

54 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But if he doesn’t make the playoffs next year, it’s going slower than you thought, right? 

Yes to your question. Entering this season my expectation/hope was for them to stay in the playoff race to the end. And I expected this team to be in the 90 point range. The first part of the expectation is coming to fruition while the second part will fall short. 

This team's needs have clearly been identified. I expect the GM to be more aggressive in adding blue line talent. Although it didn't work out the pursuit of Chycrun was a good sign that he needed to take action.  I want the GM to be more active in adding a more dependable goalie. I'm not sure if he is going to succeed in that endeavor?

[Broken Ankles]

Sorokin with an unbelievable save. And timely too.  Isles put a hurtin on the Leafs.  That doesn’t suck.  

 

 

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, JohnC said:

My time frame is different from yours. The KA era has absolutely nothing to do with the era/s before his elevation and tenure as a GM. I understand the frustrations of many here. But my viewpoint, compared to those who constantly compare this team to teams from era in the past, is that he is taking the right approach. In fact, I would say that his rebuild is going faster than I thought it would take. I'm confident that you have another view. Nostalgia can be entrapping. 

It's not the right approach though. Yes, you accumulate and keep your draft picks initially and you primarily build through the draft. this is correct. BUT, 

you start with the goal and you build out from there. You build the culture before all the offensive talent. You create a work hard attitude and an expectation when you wear the jersey. Team play and toughness and no excuses for lack of effort. When you have that in place and are basically hard to play against, then you add the offensive talent into that culture. Talent that you have drafted and matured in the minors. They become part of the culture because it's already in place. 

We're doing it backwards (again). 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, Broken Ankles said:

Sorokin with an unbelievable save. And timely too.  Isles put a hurtin on the Leafs.  That doesn’t suck.  

 

 

islanders control their own destiny again after that thumping of the leafs. Could be a dangerous wildcard team.

meanwhile, we are not out of the Bedard sweepstakes yet. Still very possible to finish bottom 11. 

[French Collection]

8 hours ago, Broken Ankles said:

Sorokin with an unbelievable save. And timely too.  Isles put a hurtin on the Leafs.  That doesn’t suck.  

 

 

So a tough, defense first team like the Isles gives up a high danger+ scoring opportunity yet a goalie is capable of making a save which turns the tide. Hmmm.

[Randall Flagg]

48 minutes ago, French Collection said:

So a tough, defense first team like the Isles gives up a high danger+ scoring opportunity yet a goalie is capable of making a save which turns the tide. Hmmm.

The islanders actually give up loads of scoring chances. They are just good at clogging the NZ

[French Collection]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

The islanders actually give up loads of scoring chances. They are just good at clogging the NZ

And they have a top notch goalie that gives them a few big saves nearly every game. Sorokin covers up a lot of warts.

[CallawaySabres]

Vancouver, St Louis and Detroit - those are the teams that need to put a couple wins together to ensure the Sabres pick #8 or better in the draft. This is not a comment about wanting the Sabres to lose, as we know that will happen regardless. It's hard to believe that Buffalo will most likely be picking 8 or better once again....wow.

[Quint]

I hear a Las Vegas brothel has offered new LVR QB Jimmy Garapollo free sex for life. https://nypost.com/2023/03/22/jimmy-garoppolo-offered-free-sex-for-life-by-las-vegas-brothel/

Wonder if they've offered the same for Eichel, or will he have to pay double? 

 

[Contempt]

4 minutes ago, Quint said:

I hear a Las Vegas brothel has offered new LVR QB Jimmy Garapollo free sex for life. https://nypost.com/2023/03/22/jimmy-garoppolo-offered-free-sex-for-life-by-las-vegas-brothel/

Wonder if they've offered the same for Eichel, or will he have to pay double? 

 

To be fair, Jimmy's a pretty handsome dude and he's got some coin. I don't think he really HAS to pay now. However, as Charlie Sheen pointed out, you're paying them to leave.

[JohnC]

12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It's not the right approach though. Yes, you accumulate and keep your draft picks initially and you primarily build through the draft. this is correct. BUT, 

you start with the goal and you build out from there. You build the culture before all the offensive talent. You create a work hard attitude and an expectation when you wear the jersey. Team play and toughness and no excuses for lack of effort. When you have that in place and are basically hard to play against, then you add the offensive talent into that culture. Talent that you have drafted and matured in the minors. They become part of the culture because it's already in place. 

We're doing it backwards (again). 

What goalie would you have pursued in last year's offseason that was available? I have argued that the GM should have paid Ullmark a premium to re-sign him. However, it appears the player preferred to move on. Again, what goalie/s do you think was/were available last year and were willing to sign here that he should have gone after. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

What goalie would you have pursued in last year's offseason that was available? I have argued that the GM should have paid Ullmark a premium to re-sign him. However, it appears the player preferred to move on. Again, what goalie/s do you think was/were available last year and were willing to sign here that he should have gone after. 

So many possibles where do you begin..............................

You start with Ullmark. He's the perfect example of why you draft a goalie in a late round every year. They take time to develop, you bring them along slowly and then one day they just might bloom and play like the "Flower". So we developed him and then we let him slip away for nothing and now look where he is. So, prior to the deadline you offer him a solid deal, he doesn't take it you deal him and if you can't you don't have to protect him with expansion. So that's moment one.

Expansion was moment two. There were several teams with 3 goalies or 2 decent goalies and there were trade options to pick up a goalie and protect him there. HUGE missed opportunity. Vanecek would have been the primary target there imo. Easy to get I think at that moment. Currently has a .909 sv%

Another big miss was Georgiev. ,920 sv% currently. Traded for a couple 3rd rounders are you kidding me? Adams couldn't beat that deal???

Vladar was traded away by Boston for a 3rd as well. Would have made that deal. 

I would have signed Husso over Comrie. His stats aren't great but Detroit's D isn't great either so hard to say if that would have helped. Maybe not. He'd likely have been able to start more games than Comrie has though that's for sure. 

Just think about it, how would things be if our goalies were Georgiev and Vanecek with UPL in Rochester and now Levi signed for the future and all we'd have given up were a handful of 3rd rounders or even 2nd rounders to beat the offers that happened. KA simply failed miserably. 

[thewookie1]

9 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

So many possibles where do you begin..............................

You start with Ullmark. He's the perfect example of why you draft a goalie in a late round every year. They take time to develop, you bring them along slowly and then one day they just might bloom and play like the "Flower". So we developed him and then we let him slip away for nothing and now look where he is. So, prior to the deadline you offer him a solid deal, he doesn't take it you deal him and if you can't you don't have to protect him with expansion. So that's moment one.

Expansion was moment two. There were several teams with 3 goalies or 2 decent goalies and there were trade options to pick up a goalie and protect him there. HUGE missed opportunity. Vanecek would have been the primary target there imo. Easy to get I think at that moment. Currently has a .909 sv%

Another big miss was Georgiev. ,920 sv% currently. Traded for a couple 3rd rounders are you kidding me? Adams couldn't beat that deal???

Vladar was traded away by Boston for a 3rd as well. Would have made that deal. 

I would have signed Husso over Comrie. His stats aren't great but Detroit's D isn't great either so hard to say if that would have helped. Maybe not. He'd likely have been able to start more games than Comrie has though that's for sure. 

Just think about it, how would things be if our goalies were Georgiev and Vanecek with UPL in Rochester and now Levi signed for the future and all we'd have given up were a handful of 3rd rounders or even 2nd rounders to beat the offers that happened. KA simply failed miserably. 

Husso was traded for prior to signing

Boston is unlikely to have traded him in the division

Georgiev was a known headcase in NY 

[PerreaultForever]

Just now, thewookie1 said:

Husso was traded for prior to signing

Boston is unlikely to have traded him in the division

Georgiev was a known headcase in NY 

All goalies are head cases. 

[Marvin]

2 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

All goalies are head cases. 

I assume he means it like I do: calling a goalkeeper a "head case" means, "even relative to goalkeepers, he's a head case."  That was why I wanted to stay away from Georgiev over the summer.

[mjd1001]

26 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

You start with Ullmark. He's the perfect example of why you draft a goalie in a late round every year.

This I agree with. I'm not sure if there are stats to back it up, but with goalies, it seems more random as to who is good and who isn't.  The best plan?  make sure every year you take a shot on one who is rated in the top 10.  Every year.

I looked at the top 5 goalies this year in terms of GAA, and then the top 10 in terms of Save percentage. This is where they were drafted:  6th round, 2nd round, 4th round, 3rd round, 3rd round, undrafted, 5th round, 1st round, 4th round, 3rd round, undrafted.

What is the common thread? Most were drafted (meaning they were ranked in the top 10, give or take, in their draft class but few of them were prospects you needed to use a high pick on.)

so the lesson? as you said, draft one every year, use that lottery ticket each and ever year and odds are you WILL get a few that turn into quality NHL guys.

Its not like the Sabres are making much use of their lower draft picks as it is. Since the 2010 draft, here is the list of players drafted in the 3rd round or later that have made any kind of impact (even just playing in more than 82 NHL games in their entire CAREER):  Linus Ulmark (A GOALIE!), Cal Peterson (A GOALIE!), Victor Olofsson, Will Borgen, Brandon Hagel, and Jacob Bryson. 

Take your 3rd or 4th round pick each year and draft the best goalie on your list.

 

[mjd1001]

I watched a few Vancouver games lately (the plus of having all the games on demand with hulu/Espn plus) and Elias Petterson. Most of us know he is good, but after watching him play a few games, he is even better than I thought.

Almost 90 points this season, 33 goals, a plus player on a pretty bad team, and when you watch him and follow him around he passes the eye test.  There are a lot of great players in the league now, but I think he can legit be in the conversationf or top 5 forwards in the league. With Vancouver being a west coast team with a lot of late starts, and as a team not getting much attention, just how good he is I think is overlooked.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, Marvin said:

I assume he means it like I do: calling a goalkeeper a "head case" means, "even relative to goalkeepers, he's a head case."  That was why I wanted to stay away from Georgiev over the summer.

I get it, but he's looking pretty good right now isn't he. Opportunity missed. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, mjd1001 said:

This I agree with. I'm not sure if there are stats to back it up, but with goalies, it seems more random as to who is good and who isn't.  The best plan?  make sure every year you take a shot on one who is rated in the top 10.  Every year.

I looked at the top 5 goalies this year in terms of GAA, and then the top 10 in terms of Save percentage. This is where they were drafted:  6th round, 2nd round, 4th round, 3rd round, 3rd round, undrafted, 5th round, 1st round, 4th round, 3rd round, undrafted.

What is the common thread? Most were drafted (meaning they were ranked in the top 10, give or take, in their draft class but few of them were prospects you needed to use a high pick on.)

so the lesson? as you said, draft one every year, use that lottery ticket each and ever year and odds are you WILL get a few that turn into quality NHL guys.

Its not like the Sabres are making much use of their lower draft picks as it is. Since the 2010 draft, here is the list of players drafted in the 3rd round or later that have made any kind of impact (even just playing in more than 82 NHL games in their entire CAREER):  Linus Ulmark (A GOALIE!), Cal Peterson (A GOALIE!), Victor Olofsson, Will Borgen, Brandon Hagel, and Jacob Bryson. 

Take your 3rd or 4th round pick each year and draft the best goalie on your list.

 

I wouldn't go that high (3rd round) every year but all your picks after the 3rd round are going to be projects or long shots or late blooming luck and goalies by and large take a longer time so they are worth the gamble, and too many goalies in your system is not a problem. 

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So many possibles where do you begin..............................

You start with Ullmark. He's the perfect example of why you draft a goalie in a late round every year. They take time to develop, you bring them along slowly and then one day they just might bloom and play like the "Flower". So we developed him and then we let him slip away for nothing and now look where he is. So, prior to the deadline you offer him a solid deal, he doesn't take it you deal him and if you can't you don't have to protect him with expansion. So that's moment one.

Expansion was moment two. There were several teams with 3 goalies or 2 decent goalies and there were trade options to pick up a goalie and protect him there. HUGE missed opportunity. Vanecek would have been the primary target there imo. Easy to get I think at that moment. Currently has a .909 sv%

Another big miss was Georgiev. ,920 sv% currently. Traded for a couple 3rd rounders are you kidding me? Adams couldn't beat that deal???

Vladar was traded away by Boston for a 3rd as well. Would have made that deal. 

I would have signed Husso over Comrie. His stats aren't great but Detroit's D isn't great either so hard to say if that would have helped. Maybe not. He'd likely have been able to start more games than Comrie has though that's for sure. 

Just think about it, how would things be if our goalies were Georgiev and Vanecek with UPL in Rochester and now Levi signed for the future and all we'd have given up were a handful of 3rd rounders or even 2nd rounders to beat the offers that happened. KA simply failed miserably. 

You don't pay attention to what I have said over a 100 times because you are too invested clinging to your critical narrative. The Sabres could have signed Ullmarki. The GM declined because he didn't like the terms that the player was demanding. It was a premium for staying with his losing team. He wanted a year longer on term and he wanted more per annum. It was essentially a loser's tax. The GM said no because his terms were outside of the parameters that he and his analytic staff established. How do I know that to be true? Because he stated why he didn't sign the goalie on WGR. So the goalie went to a better situation for a lesser contract. The GM was too inflexible and unwilling to bend. Losing this player was a big mistake.

As far as the other goalies you listed we don't know which players were willing to come here. There were goalies that we targeted but because of their trade clauses they said no. I don't disagree with you that the GM didn't have an adequate fallback position in place for the possibility of not being able to sign Ullmark. The reality is that the Sabres are considered an unappealing place to go to by many players if there are other options. 

[PerreaultForever]

9 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You don't pay attention to what I have said over a 100 times because you are too invested clinging to your critical narrative. The Sabres could have signed Ullmarki. The GM declined because he didn't like the terms that the player was demanding. It was a premium for staying with his losing team. He wanted a year longer on term and he wanted more per annum. It was essentially a loser's tax. The GM said no because his terms were outside of the parameters that he and his analytic staff established. How do I know that to be true? Because he stated why he didn't sign the goalie on WGR. So the goalie went to a better situation for a lesser contract. The GM was too inflexible and unwilling to bend. Losing this player was a big mistake.

As far as the other goalies you listed we don't know which players were willing to come here. There were goalies that we targeted but because of their trade clauses they said no. I don't disagree with you that the GM didn't have an adequate fallback position in place for the possibility of not being able to sign Ullmark. The reality is that the Sabres are considered an unappealing place to go to by many players if there are other options. 

Ullmarki. Never heard of that guy. Sounds Russian. 🙂

I did think I was answering your question and we do agree that KA blew it with Ullmark. His analysis was dead wrong. Bruins fans were critical of Sweeney last year for that signing and now they want to give him Sainthood. GMs live and die by these decisions, it's their job. Sabres announcing "Andy's back" as if it was an accomplishment rather than a failure was kind of sad. 

I don't think Georgiev or Vanecek had no trade clauses but maybe they did. I doubt it though. They weren't established enough or big enough names to warrant that. 

[Thorner]

Friedman on Tim and friends today making a lot of good points about how hockey is suffering internationally due to lack of best on best tournaments. Says Olympics are most important but World Cup absolutely necessary sans that tournament. This was in light of a conversation about how beneficial to WBC is for baseball internationally 

Says players are very in support of it, notably McDavid, and I’ll add it’s an absolute crime we haven’t seen him on that stage 

Mentioned Mats Sundin was talking about how much Sweden is being hurt by it