The Future's so Bright, I Gotta Wear Shades😎

[Pimlach]

20 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

If you don't want to add any thought to it, sure.

You are arguing with the oldest coaching saying in the history of sport.  You are what your record says you are.

In other word there is no room for excuses, injuries, what ifs, future prospects, bad calls, should have beens, etc.  

That is one of the few facts of sport.  

[bob_sauve28]

20 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Hinostroza? Peterka? 

Peterka sure looked fast last game on that one play. I'd love to see him race Cozens 

[matter2003]

2 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Peterka sure looked fast last game on that one play. I'd love to see him race Cozens 

That whole line can fly...the play where Cousins stickhandles his way out of the zone and then turns on the afterburners and the Dman on the Sharks almost panics as he turns because Cousins blew by him so fast was pretty awesome to watch...he is skating as hard as he can to get back and Cousins is just coasting...

 

 

Edited December 6, 2022 by matter2003

[Weave]

2 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Whom is the fastest current Sabre? Not quickest but straight up fastest at top end

My first thought was Tuch.

[bob_sauve28]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

My first thought was Tuch.

Yes, he is fast, too. Another big guy with speed. 

11 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

That whole line can fly...the play where Cousins stickhandles his way out of the zone and then turns on the afterburners and the Dman on the Sharks almost panics as he turns because Cousins blew by him so fast was pretty awesome to watch...he is skating as hard as he can to get back and Cousins is just coasting...

 

 

Totally awesome play! 

[matter2003]

3 minutes ago, Weave said:

My first thought was Tuch.

I mean I think it's hard to know...there are probably at least 5 or 6 candidates.

 

Tuch, Quinn, JJP, Skinner, Thompson, Hino...

maybe Cozens and Bryson in that mix too.

[Sidc3000]

23 hours ago, LTS said:

It's interesting, I think it was only a few years ago around here people clamored about having a team that would be exciting, that would add fun and entertainment, that even if they lost at least they would lose in an entertaining fashion. They claimed that would be enough to make them happy. Now that team is here and people are unhappy.

 

 

Entertaining is a good first step. If anyone on here said that is all they need to be happy, they’re liars. The whole goal for any sports team is to win and no sports fan doesn’t want their team to win 

[LTS]

3 hours ago, Pimlach said:

You are arguing with the oldest coaching saying in the history of sport.  You are what your record says you are.

In other word there is no room for excuses, injuries, what ifs, future prospects, bad calls, should have beens, etc.  

That is one of the few facts of sport.  

if you are building a house it's not a house until it's done.. but it doesn't mean you aren't working towards having a house.  There's no snap your fingers and get there option.  And that's the deeper thought.. because if I walked about the frame of a house..no one around, nothing happening. Would I know if they are building or if they quit and it was actually being left to fall apart?

I would have to infer from the information around the house.  That's deeper thinking, but on the surface the one thing everyone can agree on.. it's not a house yet. But, will it become a house?  That's the thinking part.

4 minutes ago, Sidc3000 said:

Entertaining is a good first step. If anyone on here said that is all they need to be happy, they’re liars. The whole goal for any sports team is to win and no sports fan doesn’t want their team to win 

And yet they said it.

[Pimlach]

3 hours ago, LTS said:

if you are building a house it's not a house until it's done.. but it doesn't mean you aren't working towards having a house.  There's no snap your fingers and get there option.  And that's the deeper thought.. because if I walked about the frame of a house..no one around, nothing happening. Would I know if they are building or if they quit and it was actually being left to fall apart?

I would have to infer from the information around the house.  That's deeper thinking, but on the surface the one thing everyone can agree on.. it's not a house yet. But, will it become a house?  That's the thinking part.

 

 

Think "deep" all you want, but your example has nothing to do with the saying "you are what your record is".    It is just a simple way of saying that excuses do not matter.  They sure don't matter in the standings for professional hockey anyways.  

 

 

 

 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Pimlach

[Curt]

8 hours ago, matter2003 said:

I mean I think it's hard to know...there are probably at least 5 or 6 candidates.

 

Tuch, Quinn, JJP, Skinner, Thompson, Hino...

maybe Cozens and Bryson in that mix too.

I always find it interesting players that other people think are fast skaters.

Straight line speed, I don’t think of Quinn, Skinner, or even Thompson as fast.  Tuch, Peterka, Cozens, Girgensons, Hinostroza would be my picks.

[Digger]

11 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Peterka sure looked fast last game on that one play. I'd love to see him race Cozens 

At the drop of the puck I have always been impressed at how fast Cozens moves.  Right from his first rookie camp it was really noticeable to me.

Peterka is fast and shifty as well.  I forget which game it was now but I remember Peterka had the puck driving down the ice hear the other team's bench and he went around the player trying to check him like a pylon.

They are certainly a fun trio (Cozens, Peterka, Quinn) to watch in the last few games.

[LTS]

19 hours ago, Pimlach said:

 

Think "deep" all you want, but your example has nothing to do with the saying "you are what your record is".    It is just a simple way of saying that excuses do not matter.  They sure don't matter in the standings for professional hockey anyways.  

 

 

 

 

Yes, for the simple minded "you are what your record is" is true. And for that moment in time, its accurate. It does nothing to reflect what will happen in the future, even so far as 1 day further.

I am sure we all live our lives thinking, "Today I am healthy.  Therefore, I am healthy."  naturally 5 minutes after saying that you could trip over a cat, smack your head and die.

 

[Thorner]

25 minutes ago, LTS said:

Yes, for the simple minded "you are what your record is" is true. And for that moment in time, its accurate. It does nothing to reflect what will happen in the future, even so far as 1 day further.

I am sure we all live our lives thinking, "Today I am healthy.  Therefore, I am healthy."  naturally 5 minutes after saying that you could trip over a cat, smack your head and die.

 

No one is saying that what our record says we are, today, is necessarily indicative of what it will be in the future: you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument. 

The argument is that, the record that we can look to, that is indeed indicative of the standings placement we truly are deserving of, today (ie: an accurate reflection of the results of our team, as assembled, thus far this season), will continue to be reflective of what we have justly achieved and assembled, going forward, at whichever point we choose to read it: it’s always reflective, but not necessarily predictive. 
 

What is does point to is that, should the aspects that led to said record not change, it’s unlikely the record would. That’s where your analogy misses the mark: should the practices that made said person healthy, to that point, continue forward, it’s unlikely they become unhealthy in any sort of immediate timeframe. The fact it would take a result as unlikely as the one you describe, tripping over a cat and dying, is exactly the point. 
 

The Sabres are deserving of the record they’ve committed to record this season: I don’t think saying that is mutually exclusive from the idea that there are factors that point to that record potentially being on the upswing moving forward. When that time comes, and our record changes: yes, we will still be what our record says - at that point in time. 

- - - 

When people say “you are what your record says you are” they are referring to it being an accurate representation of what the team in question has deserved and achieved to date, not that it will necessarily be what it deserves moving forward. 

Edited December 7, 2022 by Thorny

[Thorner]

20 hours ago, Pimlach said:

 

Think "deep" all you want, but your example has nothing to do with the saying "you are what your record is".    It is just a simple way of saying that excuses do not matter.  They sure don't matter in the standings for professional hockey anyways.  

 

 

 

 

Pretty much. There’s sort of 2 different conversations going on here. “You are what your record says” isn’t supposed to be a comment on the process, that’s not the proper context of that phrase. The context for that phrase is generally as a comment on results-to-date. Whether a team has been “hard done by” by external factors up to and including luck - ie “did this roster, in those 25 games, deserve a better fate?” or is our record this season reflective of the roster we committed to ice. 

[JohnC]

On 12/6/2022 at 9:56 AM, Pimlach said:

You are arguing with the oldest coaching saying in the history of sport.  You are what your record says you are.

In other word there is no room for excuses, injuries, what ifs, future prospects, bad calls, should have beens, etc.  

That is one of the few facts of sport.  

That is one of the few facts of life. 

[LTS]

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

No one is saying that what our record says we are, today, is necessarily indicative of what it will be in the future: you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument. 

The argument is that, the record that we can look to, that is indeed indicative of the standings placement we truly are deserving of, today (ie: an accurate reflection of the results of our team, as assembled, thus far this season), will continue to be reflective of what we have justly achieved and assembled, going forward, at whichever point we choose to read it: it’s always reflective, but not necessarily predictive. 
 

What is does point to is that, should the aspects that led to said record not change, it’s unlikely the record would. That’s where your analogy misses the mark: should the practices that made said person healthy, to that point, continue forward, it’s unlikely they become unhealthy in any sort of immediate timeframe. The fact it would take a result as unlikely as the one you describe, tripping over a cat and dying, is exactly the point. 
 

The Sabres are deserving of the record they’ve committed to record this season: I don’t think saying that is mutually exclusive from the idea that there are factors that point to that record potentially being on the upswing moving forward. When that time comes, and our record changes: yes, we will still be what our record says - at that point in time. 

- - - 

When people say “you are what your record says you are” they are referring to it being an accurate representation of what the team in question has deserved and achieved to date, not that it will necessarily be what it deserves moving forward. 

This is a helpful explanation and largely agree.  But even then, do you have to account for factors like a front-loaded easier/harder schedule? That state of the opponent at the time?

Take the teams that beat the Bills during periods of higher injuries.. do they get more credit than they deserve?

So, yeah, at that point in time, given all the factors, they earned that.  But the question is, if you don't consider all the factors, are you getting an accurate representation on which to base an opinion?  The irrefutable fact is the record, I absolutely agree there.

 

[Thorner]

22 minutes ago, LTS said:

This is a helpful explanation and largely agree.  But even then, do you have to account for factors like a front-loaded easier/harder schedule? That state of the opponent at the time?

Take the teams that beat the Bills during periods of higher injuries.. do they get more credit than they deserve?

So, yeah, at that point in time, given all the factors, they earned that.  But the question is, if you don't consider all the factors, are you getting an accurate representation on which to base an opinion?  The irrefutable fact is the record, I absolutely agree there.

 

Yes, but I think those factors are all built-in to the principle, though, right? The record is reflective. If we’ve played difficult teams within the 25 games, it’s fitting we have 13 losses. I don’t think the roster we’ve assembled deserves a better fate. This is accounting for said context. It’s reflective, for example, of a young team. If we truly are undergoing the development we seek, if strength of schedule truly is a factor, here - our record will presumably also be reflective of the easier schedule, once it arrives. 
 

And assuming our record improves, it doesn’t then mean that, looking back,  our record at this time wasn’t actually reflective: it still was/is. The curve would indicate the growth/schedule/system improvement/etc. Good young team getting better wouldn’t mean young team was “(THIS) good all along.” It means it achieved varying results tantamount to what might be expected, given context, at varying points along the way. 
 

The heart of the cliche, and that’s what it is, is fundamentally positive, in essence. The idea that you have the ability to control your own destiny. You make you own record. If you control what you can, and manage it well, the record will come to reflect it. The results aren’t potentially being hidden from you based on bad luck. 
 

This doesn’t mean we ignore all context for WHY a record is what it is - ie a young team’s struggles meaning that our record could be seen as both deserved yet likely to improve 

there are lots of indicators others have mentioned that point to us soon improving a LOT 

Edited December 7, 2022 by Thorny

[Pimlach]

5 hours ago, LTS said:

Yes, for the simple minded "you are what your record is" is true. And for that moment in time, its accurate. It does nothing to reflect what will happen in the future, even so far as 1 day further.

I am sure we all live our lives thinking, "Today I am healthy.  Therefore, I am healthy."  naturally 5 minutes after saying that you could trip over a cat, smack your head and die.

 

You are inferring that I am simple minded.  I am not describing how to project anything into the future either.  This saying does not do that either. 

I read the examples you put forth to support your position in your last two posts.  They are silly and off base.  

 

[Pimlach]

5 hours ago, Thorny said:

Pretty much. There’s sort of 2 different conversations going on here. “You are what your record says” isn’t supposed to be a comment on the process, that’s not the proper context of that phrase. The context for that phrase is generally as a comment on results-to-date. Whether a team has been “hard done by” by external factors up to and including luck - ie “did this roster, in those 25 games, deserve a better fate?” or is our record this season reflective of the roster we committed to ice. 

Exactly.    You get it. 

[FrenchConnection44]

It is looking bright, imo. 

No idea what we will do for free agency. But if we can get Levi in here - he will still need some time to develop but within 2 years he could be huge. Kind of our Grant Fuhr. 😉  Goaltending is something one can never predict for sure. It's often a confidence issue. And Luukkonen could still get better. And needs to. 

Two areas I think we need to upgrade.

1. Center: I think Middlestadt needs to be traded for whatever we can get. He has the tools but he just seems to play soft and then disappear on some shifts. We need to add a two-way center in his place. One that can get face-offs in our zone on key situations, and be a great back checker. Dylan is that already, and he needs to get stronger. But I think we need another strong center with good size. 

Bo Horvat, if he makes it to free agency, is a player I'd love to have. Physical I've seen him twice this year and he's looked really solid. Good defensive center and also wins face-offs. Add a player of this calibre and our team changes. His scouting report from one site (just the guy to replace Middlestadt): 

Has grown into a shutdown center capable of making big contributions even when he is not generating a lot of offense. In addition, he has gotten much better at driving play--even when starting shifts in the defensive zone. He skates well and is among the NHL's best face-off men, meaning his team ends up with the puck more often than not. Is also a team leader who can play a lot of minutes at a high level. Quality two-way center and leader.

We have a ton of small guys coming up in the ranks that are high draft picks and surely one will emerge. But they all are at least a year if not two away and none are heavy on the defensive end. 

2. Defenseman: Basically we have Dahlin, Samuelsson, and Power as mainstays. Jokiharu is good with  more upside. That's 4. Lyubushkin could still be good if he gets healthy and be a mainstay next year. But I see Joki as more of a #5-6 defenseman overall unless he improves. We have to develop some solid defense. I think 1-2 more defensive defensemen could really shore things up the next few years.

As far as free agents, this year is not great for defensemen. Had Weegar not gotten an extension he might have been a great addition (one of the best defenders in blocking passes). Klingberg is a very good offensive defenseman. Average defensively. We are 32nd in the league in giving up "high danger chances." Matt Dumba will arguably be the best free agent defenseman on the market. He's a good two way player and physical which we could use. I'd really try to go after him if he reaches free agency. 

Other than Power, we haven't spent a lot of draft capital on defensemen in the past few drafts. 

Ryan Johnson (Minnesota Gophers) - I assume we still have his rights? Seems to be a good player but not producing a lot offensively. His plus minus is solid, though. Also not a big player for a defenseman. No idea what's going on there. 

Vsevolod Komarov is a young player with a lot of upside, imo. Good size (6'3, 188 and will probably get to 200 in a couple of years). Only 18. I like the potential there but, again, he's two years away though (hopefully we will get him on the Amerks next year). But he's coached by Patrick Roy so that's a positive. Here's a nice report on him before this past draft when the Sabres selected him: 

On the ice, there are a lot of things to like about Komarov’s game according to Remparts head coach, Patrick Roy.

“Hockey wise, I really love his poise with the puck. He’s very patient, doesn’t get rid of it, moves it very well, rarely makes mistakes on his first pass and defends really well,” Roy explained. “He’s a big, strong kid and I feel like he has a good mix of offense and defense because he’s got those skills with the puck.”

Roy is no stranger to coaching talented Russians and overcoming a language barrier after being behind the bench when Alexander Radulov, now a nine-year NHL veteran, played for Quebec from 2004-2006.

Although the Remparts have several highly touted draft eligible players on the roster this season, Komarov is making sure that he doesn’t fly under the radar and the hockey world is certainly taking notice. With six points in his first 23 games, he has been given a “B” rating in the NHL Central Scouting’s latest rankings and Roy is confident his 6’3’’ blueliner has what it takes to succeed at the next level.

“He needs to get stronger, and his skating has to improve, but he’s got all of the tools,” Roy said. “I think he just needs to keep working on his game. He has a great mindset and I see good things coming for him.”

Roy’s endorsement isn’t surprising considering that Komarov’s style of play and his abilities with the puck are well-suited for today’s NHL. Puck-moving defensemen are a hot commodity these days, which means that Komarov could be a popular name on the draft floor this summer.

Edited December 8, 2022 by FrenchConnection44

[sabresparaavida]

Horvat will get a lot more money than it would make sense for us to pay. We have our top 6 Cs and he is not a bottom 6 guy (certainly won’t be payed like one)

[Refuting]

@ Guy above me 

Do not agree. We have the cap space, use it. Horvat is fundamentally sound in all aspects

Just make the Cozens line the 3rd line 

I want a team that's reminiscent of the 05-06 team. Horvat would be a huge step in achieving that 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sabresparaavida]

2 minutes ago, Refuting said:

@ Guy above me 

Do not agree. We have the cap space, use it. Horvat is fundamentally sound in all aspects

Just make the Cozens line the 3rd line 

I want a team that's reminiscent of the 05-06 team. Horvat would be a huge step in achieving that 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Horvat will be wanting a 7 year contact. He currently has 20 goals and 29 points In 27 games (pacing for 60 goals, 88 points, but unlikely to get there imo). His previous career high is 61 points and 31 goals (separate seasons). He is also shooting at 22.2% with his career sh% being 13.7% He will be 28 when the season is done. He is going to want to be paid for his production this year, and for 7 years (think Kadri deal), but is going to start declining quickly into that contract. In 3 years he likely would get in the way of signing Power/JJP/Quinn. 

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Refuting said:

@ Guy above me 

Do not agree. We have the cap space, use it. Horvat is fundamentally sound in all aspects

Just make the Cozens line the 3rd line 

I want a team that's reminiscent of the 05-06 team. Horvat would be a huge step in achieving that 

You have to pay Cozens next year. You'd have to pay Horvat next year and he's a ufa meaning cha-ching.

We have 31 million in space. Let's say we get lucky and do 6 for Cozens and 9 for Horvat. Half your cap is gone and you need 3 more forwards and another 2 defense plus a goalie. You can do that 15 million fairly efficiently... but

What cap space? I just got rid of most of it and I still have to pay Dahlin, Power, Joker, the year after. Then I have to pay Quinn and JJP. 

I'm not saying you can't, just that it will get really tight cap wise in a hurry. 

[tom webster]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You have to pay Cozens next year. You'd have to pay Horvat next year and he's a ufa meaning cha-ching.

We have 31 million in space. Let's say we get lucky and do 6 for Cozens and 9 for Horvat. Half your cap is gone and you need 3 more forwards and another 2 defense plus a goalie. You can do that 15 million fairly efficiently... but

What cap space? I just got rid of most of it and I still have to pay Dahlin, Power, Joker, the year after. Then I have to pay Quinn and JJP. 

I'm not saying you can't, just that it will get really tight cap wise in a hurry. 

Except that the cap will be close to $95M/$100M in 2-3 years. The time to grab someone, if you want to, is now before everybody has space again.