How bad is Casey Mittelstadt?

[inkman]

9 minutes ago, Refuting said:

Should have traded him 3 years ago 

[SABRES 0311]

Mitts would benefit from a trade. His time here has run it’s course I think. Coaching has put him on different lines, different positions, different situations. It’s just not working. Nothing against him but it’s time to move on.

Same with Olof. One gets moved at the deadline and the other in the off-season.

[nfreeman]

He was pretty lousy today vs Boston.

[Berg]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

He was pretty lousy today vs Boston.

Not agree. He was not bad. 

[nfreeman]

6 hours ago, Berg said:

Not agree. He was not bad. 

Well, Mitts was DFL on the team in expected GF% and HD chance %.

What did you like about his game?

[Eleven]

7 hours ago, Berg said:

Not agree. He was not bad. 

He turned over the puck on three consecutive shifts in the first period!

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

He turned over the puck on three consecutive shifts in the first period!

So did Thompson. In every period.

If he just made the easy play, instead of trying to force the cute play, I think he could be really good.

He set up Thompson for two prime scoring chances in OT the shift before they won and Tage pooched them both. I thought Thompson did not have a great game yesterday (other than his goal, of course.)

Edited January 1, 2023 by SwampD

[bunomatic]

When I think about Casey what comes to mind is the 2 or 3 strides with his head down where it appears he’s hustling back out of Bostons zone after losing, choking up or giving away the puck only to let up and coast as his team mates chase the Bruins down into our zone. Every friggin time. His backcheck is essentially 2 or 3 strides then glide. A few games ago before the blizzard ( not sure which game ) he did come back hard and strip someone of the puck or intercept a pass but that was an outlier. He’s either out of shape or lazy.

[Wyldnwoody44]

I know it's just a documentary of very young bachelors. But that one with 37 just screamed that he's lazy. I know it's reading too much into a short episode but he never appeared to have that IT factor at any point. 

I'm not sure it's his drive or aerobic capacity, but it would take a major 180 for Mitts to stay on this team in my eyes. 

[triumph_communes]

Mittelstadt, Oloffson, and Krebs are the most easily replaced players regularly in the line up. Only one of those still has expectations to improve. 
 

Will be curious if they are tradeable assets. I’d keep Oloffson and trade Mittelstadt for someone more defensively sound. 

[Flashsabre]

If Mitts was drafted 28th his development wouldn’t be as much of an issue but for an 8th OA pick he has struggled. 

Both Mitts and Krebs struggle when moved to the wing. Krebs is rounding into form as a C. Krebs can play a physical game and focus on D which helps him slot in easier in a bottom 6 role.

Mitts has good games and bad. He lacks consistency which he should have at this point. Losing most of last season didn’t help but he can be a piece to be moved at this point. He is a good piece on the PP but can lose focus which leads to sloppy turnovers. 

Him and VO don’t gel very well. They play better with Asplund on the line but the 3 of them could be pieces moved out for upgrades.

[Taro T]

32 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

If Mitts was drafted 28th his development wouldn’t be as much of an issue but for an 8th OA pick he has struggled. 

Both Mitts and Krebs struggle when moved to the wing. Krebs is rounding into form as a C. Krebs can play a physical game and focus on D which helps him slot in easier in a bottom 6 role.

Mitts has good games and bad. He lacks consistency which he should have at this point. Losing most of last season didn’t help but he can be a piece to be moved at this point. He is a good piece on the PP but can lose focus which leads to sloppy turnovers. 

Him and VO don’t gel very well. They play better with Asplund on the line but the 3 of them could be pieces moved out for upgrades.

Well, that's the rub.

None of the other 3 lines are getting broken up any time soon & Granato isn't benching either.  So, they need to figure out how to play together.  Or at least 1 will be moved by the end of next season if not sooner.

[PerreaultForever]

17 hours ago, Broken Ankles said:

The only way the Sabres are involved in a Horvat trade is if they are a third party holding cap for a Toronto or similar cap strapped team.  Adams would not add a player like this unless he would extend, and you don’t extend a center for $9m plus after you just signed Tage.

I agree it's very unlikely, but I also see no reason why you wouldn't add a player like that if you wanted to become a serious contender. He's exactly what we need in terms of forwards. We have more than enough money sitting around. 

 

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I agree it's very unlikely, but I also see no reason why you wouldn't add a player like that if you wanted to become a serious contender. He's exactly what we need in terms of forwards. We have more than enough money sitting around. 

 

That’s because you continually dismiss both the value and the cost of development.

The reason why is very clearly asset management under the cap and Horvat’s age relative to the age and importance of the rest of your core. 

Im not aware of any team paying their 3C $8 million and it strikes me as poor roster planning under the cap for a team that currently has no starting goalie, a lot of players on their ELCs who will be looking for raises, and appears to be building its future on the backs of 2 sure-to-be-expensive franchise defencemen.

Would you rather invest $8 million over the next 8 years in Dylan Cozens as your 2C and keep 2 premium prospects and $6 million in cap space to invest elsewhere in the roster?

Or invest $8 million over the next 8 years and 2 premium prospects in acquiring Bo Horvat as your 2C, sign Cozens to a $6 million short-term bridge deal, and deal with trading Cozens or others in 3 years to stay under the cap?

Horvat certainly improves the team this year and next. But what is the opportunity cost? Is he the missing piece to a cup contender? Is he going to prevent you from adding/keeping the missing piece from a cup contender down the road?

Personally, I think I’d lean in on Thompson/Cozens as my top 2 centres like the Bruins did with Bergeron/Krecji and avoid paying a big ticket for my 3C so I can use that money elsewhere.

Under the cap, it’s a zero-sum game and you have to account for both long-term ramifications and opportunity cost.

Edited January 1, 2023 by dudacek

[Marvin]

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I agree it's very unlikely, but I also see no reason why you wouldn't add a player like that if you wanted to become a serious contender. He's exactly what we need in terms of forwards. We have more than enough money sitting around. 

 

I do.  Cost.  As with Chychrun, the asking price for Horvat is currently absurd.  Moreover, he turned down a contract from Vancouver with an AAV above Thompson's.  There is no way I would pay the price to get him, let alone keep him into his 30's.

What I want is what I wish Mittlestadt and Olofsson were as opposed to what they actually are.  IMHO, I would play Asplund and Hinostroza over them starting tonight.

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

That’s because you continually dismiss both the value and the cost of development.

The reason why is very clearly asset management under the cap and Horvat’s age relative to the age and importance of the rest of your core. 

Im not aware of any team paying their 3C $8 million and it strikes me as poor roster planning under the cap for a team that currently has no starting goalie, a lot of players on their ELCs who will be looking for raises, and appears to be building its future on the backs of 2 sure-to-be-expensive franchise defencemen.

Would you rather invest $8 million over the next 8 years in Dylan Cozens as your 2C and keep 2 premium prospects and $6 million in cap space to invest elsewhere in the roster?

Or invest $8 million over the next 8 years and 2 premium prospects in acquiring Bo Horvat as your 2C, sign Cozens to a $6 million short-term bridge deal, and deal with trading Cozens or others in 3 years to stay under the cap?

Horvat certainly improves the team this year and next. But what is the opportunity cost? Is he the missing piece to a cup contender? Is he going to prevent you from adding/keeping the missing piece from a cup contender down the road?

Personally, I think I’d lean in on Thompson/Cozens as my top 2 centres like the Bruins did with Bergeron/Krecji and avoid paying a big ticket for my 3C so I can use that money elsewhere.

Under the cap, it’s a zero-sum game and you have to account for both long-term ramifications and opportunity cost.

You misunderstand me. I'm willing to pay Horvat but not for 8 years. If he wants that money for that term then I'm not interested. 

Cap management is about veterans (who might be overpaid) falling off the payroll as younger players get pay increases. It's a balance. You don't have to be a cap floor team in anticipation of a payroll increase coming 2 or 3 years down the road. We have more than enough room to add talent AND pay those who earn it down the road. 

[Taro T]

10 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

You misunderstand me. I'm willing to pay Horvat but not for 8 years. If he wants that money for that term then I'm not interested. 

Cap management is about veterans (who might be overpaid) falling off the payroll as younger players get pay increases. It's a balance. You don't have to be a cap floor team in anticipation of a payroll increase coming 2 or 3 years down the road. We have more than enough room to add talent AND pay those who earn it down the road. 

How crazy an offer are you going to make to Horvat to re-sign at only 4 years?  Can't see him accepting anything less than 7 years & likely the full 8 if he's moved before the deadline.

[PerreaultForever]

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

How crazy an offer are you going to make to Horvat to re-sign at only 4 years?  Can't see him accepting anything less than 7 years & likely the full 8 if he's moved before the deadline.

That may very well be the case, and if so, then no. It's all hypotheticals. 

My free agent targets will be lesser names anyway but as  a GM you explore every option. If you can get a Horvat right now for 4 years you do it. If not, you don't. 

[Scottysabres]

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

That may very well be the case, and if so, then no. It's all hypotheticals. 

My free agent targets will be lesser names anyway but as  a GM you explore every option. If you can get a Horvat right now for 4 years you do it. If not, you don't. 

I respectfully don't agree. The Sabres need high energy, fast skating, beef. They already score plenty enough, what they lack is a sprinkling of the above mentioned, both on the front as well as the back end. Just my 2 pennies.

[Pimlach]

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

That may very well be the case, and if so, then no. It's all hypotheticals. 

My free agent targets will be lesser names anyway but as  a GM you explore every option. If you can get a Horvat right now for 4 years you do it. If not, you don't. 

And maybe Adam’s has looked into it and maybe Horvat will not fit?  No one knows unless they work deep inside the Sabres FO.  We drafted three centers in the first round last year, another factor to consider.  

A solid veteran RHD is the big need right now.  

[Crusader1969]

I often listen to Canucks central podcast when I go to sleep.  Would rather Sabres material but that just keeps me up as my mind won’t stop thinking  about who will eventually replace Bryson in the top 6  lol

anyways, they often complain about Horvat being lazy, not to the extent of JT MIller but still it’s a major red flag   Of course Horvat is scoring a lot to lesson their criticism of him   MThey often point out not hustling for line changes, uninterested in back checking  

Major red flag in my book  

 

 

 

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

I respectfully don't agree. The Sabres need high energy, fast skating, beef. They already score plenty enough, what they lack is a sprinkling of the above mentioned, both on the front as well as the back end. Just my 2 pennies.

Well you're not really disagreeing with my feelings at all. Beef doesn't always skate as fast as you'd like but if you can get both together sure. 

This is why on the back end my target would be Conor Clifton. He's not too old, in his prime, he hits hard and frequently but can also move the puck and keep up with the speed. He's like a better Lybushkin. He's also grossly underpaid and ripe for a big raise which I doubt the Bruins will be willing to pony up for after they pay Pasternak and some of their other UFAs. He's my main D target unless you land a higher profile player in a trade or other type of move. 

6 hours ago, Pimlach said:

And maybe Adam’s has looked into it and maybe Horvat will not fit?  No one knows unless they work deep inside the Sabres FO.  We drafted three centers in the first round last year, another factor to consider.  

A solid veteran RHD is the big need right now.  

I agree. I've said it before and will keep saying it. Conor Clifton. 

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

I respectfully don't agree. The Sabres need high energy, fast skating, beef. They already score plenty enough, what they lack is a sprinkling of the above mentioned, both on the front as well as the back end. Just my 2 pennies.

What does this mean? Size?

They certainly don't lack high energy or fast skating. 

[Crusader1969]

28 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What does this mean? Size?

They certainly don't lack high energy or fast skating. 

 

[Cascade Youth]

I am ready to move on from him.  He seems weak - both mentally and physically.  Just so rarely makes strong individual plays and has yet to take a game over.  He doesn’t have it.