Current Projected 2024-25 roster

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I guess it's all about personal perspective, but to say "numerous cases aren't even close" is what sounds like serious crack to me, but I also know that you will never give the Sabres the benefit of the doubt on anything.

We often disagree so I want to focus on this so maybe you understand me better. I passed the point of paper evaluations and fandom quite a while ago. The team has just underachieved and disappointed too many times. They have to show it on the ice, not in some hypothetical terms for me. When they do that, if they do that, then I give them the credit but not before. Not any benefit of a doubt. They just haven't earned that. Show me, plain and simple. 

Carolina players have proved it on the ice. There is some question on their ability to win in the playoffs and get to the next level, but the level they are at is most definitely proven.

So yes, the Brind'Amour factor is a thing. Coaching matters. If you've noticed, I was high on the Ruff signing and I do think this could signal a shift. One can hope, but they still have to show it. I know Ruff can coach, but he faltered in New Jersey didn't he? Yes, injuries on D and bad goaltending to blame, but that could happen here too. How these forwards buy in and/or come together remains to be seen. We certainly have to hope Ruff can turn things around, because if he fails what then? Full tear down again and restart again? It will be dire at that point if it gets there. So no, no benefit of a doubt. 13 years has sucked all those benefits away. Show me. 

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

We often disagree so I want to focus on this so maybe you understand me better. I passed the point of paper evaluations and fandom quite a while ago. The team has just underachieved and disappointed too many times. They have to show it on the ice, not in some hypothetical terms for me. When they do that, if they do that, then I give them the credit but not before. Not any benefit of a doubt. They just haven't earned that. Show me, plain and simple. 

Carolina players have proved it on the ice. There is some question on their ability to win in the playoffs and get to the next level, but the level they are at is most definitely proven.

So yes, the Brind'Amour factor is a thing. Coaching matters. If you've noticed, I was high on the Ruff signing and I do think this could signal a shift. One can hope, but they still have to show it. I know Ruff can coach, but he faltered in New Jersey didn't he? Yes, injuries on D and bad goaltending to blame, but that could happen here too. How these forwards buy in and/or come together remains to be seen. We certainly have to hope Ruff can turn things around, because if he fails what then? Full tear down again and restart again? It will be dire at that point if it gets there. So no, no benefit of a doubt. 13 years has sucked all those benefits away. Show me. 

The one thing that can’t/won’t happen is a full tear down and re-start. Attempting that after 9 years missing was already incredibly folly. If Adams gets canned they’ll need to be focusing on the candidates that preach turning the pieces we have into something viable rather than another “pressure’s off” approach where we slow play winning another several years. They truly cannot afford that 

Edited July 17 by Thorny

[dudacek]

19 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

We often disagree so I want to focus on this so maybe you understand me better. I passed the point of paper evaluations and fandom quite a while ago. The team has just underachieved and disappointed too many times. They have to show it on the ice, not in some hypothetical terms for me. When they do that, if they do that, then I give them the credit but not before. Not any benefit of a doubt. They just haven't earned that. Show me, plain and simple. 

Carolina players have proved it on the ice. There is some question on their ability to win in the playoffs and get to the next level, but the level they are at is most definitely proven.

So yes, the Brind'Amour factor is a thing. Coaching matters. If you've noticed, I was high on the Ruff signing and I do think this could signal a shift. One can hope, but they still have to show it. I know Ruff can coach, but he faltered in New Jersey didn't he? Yes, injuries on D and bad goaltending to blame, but that could happen here too. How these forwards buy in and/or come together remains to be seen. We certainly have to hope Ruff can turn things around, because if he fails what then? Full tear down again and restart again? It will be dire at that point if it gets there. So no, no benefit of a doubt. 13 years has sucked all those benefits away. Show me. 

We may not disagree as much as it seems.

 

15 minutes ago, Thorny said:

The one thing that can’t/won’t happen is a full tear down and re-start. Attempting that after 9 years missing was already incredibly folly. If Adams gets canned they’ll need to be focusing on the candidates that preach turning the pieces we have into something viable rather than another “pressure’s off” approach where we slow play winning another several years. They truly cannot afford that 

The thing that has me rooting for Adams most is that if he's wrong, it means his core is not nearly as good as he thinks it is.

And if they aren't, the new regime isn't going to be able to turn it around quickly, no matter what their intentions.

Semi-related, I have decided I am not on board with a playoffs or bust mindset.

It's been too ***** long to get a sniff and fade away again. At the very minimum this suffering needs to pay off with at least a Carolina-level run of being good.

Edited July 17 by dudacek

[PerreaultForever]

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

The one thing that can’t/won’t happen is a full tear down and re-start. Attempting that after 9 years missing was already incredibly folly. If Adams gets canned they’ll need to be focusing on the candidates that preach turning the pieces we have into something viable rather than another “pressure’s off” approach where we slow play winning another several years. They truly cannot afford that 

I don't disagree but that's you and me not them (Pegula). He's never put an experienced hockey guy in charge. He's never followed the model most teams follow. Ruff is the first senior hire and that's mostly for legacy I'd think. If this team fails this year one would think Adams has to be fired, and the new guy might want "subtractions" and who knows what. I have no idea what happens if Ruff fails. I'd hope Pegula would get out and turn it over to someone who gets it, but I doubt that would happen. He might just think Adams was to blame and do it all over again. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

We may not disagree as much as it seems.

 

The thing that has me rooting for Adams most is that if he's wrong, it means his core is not nearly as good as he thinks it is.

And if they aren't, the new regime isn't going to be able to turn it around quickly, no matter what their intentions.

Semi-related, I have decided I am not on board with a playoffs or bust mindset.

It's been too ***** long to get a sniff and fade away again. At the very minimum this suffering needs to be off with at least a Carolina-level run of being good.

Easier I guess but where do you draw the line? Will you want Adams fired? Players changed? Will you just write off another year on if only this guy or that guy wasn't injured or we just need this kid to step up or............ there's always something. 

To me, missing the playoffs again has to be viewed as failure. What you do with that failure is open to discussion I suppose. 

[Thorny]

39 minutes ago, dudacek said:

We may not disagree as much as it seems.

 

The thing that has me rooting for Adams most is that if he's wrong, it means his core is not nearly as good as he thinks it is.

And if they aren't, the new regime isn't going to be able to turn it around quickly, no matter what their intentions.

Semi-related, I have decided I am not on board with a playoffs or bust mindset.

It's been too ***** long to get a sniff and fade away again. At the very minimum this suffering needs to pay off with at least a Carolina-level run of being good.

This post really does do a good job highlighting how far apart we are, nowadays. And, to be honest: it’s not my stance that has shifted. You were preaching the time was now *LAST* year, and now a full year later have instead moved the opposite way, backing down from playoffs being the requirement.

You underrate how easy it is to make the playoffs. It’s just buffalo that can’t. Saying the new regime couldn’t turn it around quickly doesn’t make sense when the turnover to playoff contention league wide is demonstrably shorter than your are portraying. Any 80 point team can feasibly make the playoffs after a single solid offseason, maybe 2. The variable is the competence of those executing the strategy. 

You’ve truly bought the narrative that playoff teams require 5 year plans. I admire the optimism, as you are a true optimist, it’s not virtue signaling clearly like we can sometimes see with other posts, but the performance of the team vs your expectations has cleary eroded your stance to that optimism and nothing more. You are equal but opposite to the pessimism of Perreault’s posts 

Edited July 17 by Thorny

[Thorny]

41 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I don't disagree but that's you and me not them (Pegula). He's never put an experienced hockey guy in charge. He's never followed the model most teams follow. Ruff is the first senior hire and that's mostly for legacy I'd think. If this team fails this year one would think Adams has to be fired, and the new guy might want "subtractions" and who knows what. I have no idea what happens if Ruff fails. I'd hope Pegula would get out and turn it over to someone who gets it, but I doubt that would happen. He might just think Adams was to blame and do it all over again. 

Great 

Yes, if your argument is the Sabres COULD do it better, like other teams, but just choose not to, that’s sort of what I’m saying. It doesn’t need to be that way: and it’s not, anywhere else. Just buffalo 

[Thorny]

38 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

What you do with that failure is open to discussion I suppose. 

What do we do? 

cower in fear and count our prospects, presumably. 

[PerreaultForever]

24 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Great 

Yes, if your argument is the Sabres COULD do it better, like other teams, but just choose not to, that’s sort of what I’m saying. It doesn’t need to be that way: and it’s not, anywhere else. Just buffalo 

Oh I agree 100%. I've said it many times, as have others, it's Pegula. There are other owners who meddle, but for the most part they hire people to make the decisions and then after time if they are unhappy they fire them and hire new ones. Jacobs is one of the most powerful owners in hockey but he doesn't sit in on meetings with Sweeney and Montgomery. Once in a while he might call Neely out to the golf course and give him a few thoughts, but like most owners he isn't taking notes and meddling in day to day affairs. Hiring yes men is not the way to success. 

21 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What do we do? 

cower in fear and count our prospects, presumably. 

Well I really don't know. I can speculate since it's the summer I guess but hopefully we finally have success and never find out. 

Purely speculating, I suppose it depends on who hired Ruff? Did Pegula tell Adams to hire Ruff or did Adams finally convince Terry that they needed to stop hiring rookie and green coaches and hire a solid veteran coach? Who reconstructed the make up of the roster? Is this Adams idea or did Ruff ask for (or demand as a condition of taking the job) that changes be made in that regard? Did Terry finally give up on his idea and sigh and say, okay, we will do it Lindy's way and see? If Terry hired Lindy then Adams might get fired and Lindy might get even more power. If Adams hired Ruff against terry's opinion then they'll both be gone maybe. Could they stay the course for yet another year if it fails? I have literally no idea. Of course they could, but it'll be depressing as F...

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

Easier I guess but where do you draw the line? Will you want Adams fired? Players changed? Will you just write off another year on if only this guy or that guy wasn't injured or we just need this kid to step up or............ there's always something. 

To me, missing the playoffs again has to be viewed as failure. What you do with that failure is open to discussion I suppose. 

 

33 minutes ago, Thorny said:

This post really does do a good job highlighting how far apart we are, nowadays. And, to be honest: it’s not my stance that has shifted. You were preaching the time was now *LAST* year, and now a full year later have instead moved the opposite way, backing down from playoffs being the requirement.

You underrate how easy it is to make the playoffs. It’s just buffalo that can’t. Saying the new regime couldn’t turn it around quickly doesn’t make sense when the turnover to playoff contention league wide is demonstrably shorter than your are portraying. Any 80 point team can feasibly make the playoffs after a single solid offseason, maybe 2. The variable is the competence of those executing the strategy. 

You’ve truly bought the narrative that playoff teams require 5 year plans. I admire the optimism, as you are a true optimist, it’s not virtue signaling clearly like we can sometimes see with other posts, but the performance of the team vs your expectations has cleary eroded your stance to that optimism and nothing more. You are equal but opposite to the pessimism of Perreault’s posts 

Missing the playoffs in the year that just finished marked a failure for the season. Missing the playoffs again this year will almost certainly mark a failure of the Adams build.

@Thorny I haven't shifted in either of these areas.

I have come to realize though how far apart were on the sad state of the franchise in the summer of 2021, and how much was required to fix it.

And I never just wanted to make the playoffs — for me it's a signpost of progress, not a goal — I want to be Carolina, Boston, and especially Tampa; I want to be good and good for a long time.

[Thorny]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Missing the playoffs in the year that just finished marked a failure for the season. Missing the playoffs again this year will almost certainly mark a failure of the Adams build.

@Thorny I haven't shifted in either of these areas.

I have come to realize though how far apart were on the sad state of the franchise in the summer of 2021, and how much was required to fix it.

And I never just wanted to make the playoffs — for me it's a signpost of progress, not a goal — I want to be Carolina, Boston, and especially Tampa; I want to be good and good for a long time.

Fair enough. You are saying missing again would be a fail but the issue of whether the GM should be replaced doesn’t hinge on that. Because you fear the alternative path should Pegula go in another direction. I can’t agree, I can’t see things as being any worse and I stringently believe that, from where we are NOW (let’s leave 2021 aside, you are correct we also don’t see eye to eye there), opting for a long form build with a new GM would be insane. We are a year-over-year team right now re: reasonable feasibility of finding success.

the most salient distinction comes in your last line and it’s a very, very philosophical difference that we can probably draw a line to almost always when we disagree. We do have a different goal. When the goals are SO far apart as they are in this case (let’s be honest, making the playoffs is a 50/50 prop and winning the cup is unlikely straight up, there’s a chasm there) it’s somewhat surprising our stances aline as often as they do 

We are looking for different things; follow the team for different reasons  

Edited July 17 by Thorny

[PerreaultForever]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Missing the playoffs in the year that just finished marked a failure for the season. Missing the playoffs again this year will almost certainly mark a failure of the Adams build.

@Thorny I haven't shifted in either of these areas.

I have come to realize though how far apart were on the sad state of the franchise in the summer of 2021, and how much was required to fix it.

And I never just wanted to make the playoffs — for me it's a signpost of progress, not a goal — I want to be Carolina, Boston, and especially Tampa; I want to be good and good for a long time.

Well I did realize it back in 2021 and I was told I was a fake Sabres fan and I should go to Boston etc. etc.   I was generally too pessimistic for most around here. 

I'm also 100% with you that I want long term perennial success but you have to take steps and making the playoffs is the first step. The players on the team need that taste. It's very rare for a perennial loser  to become a perennial winner right away. More likely you make it and have a few years of up and down in and out before it all comes together. These players really NEED to make the playoffs, just to get that taste and see what things can be. Normalize winning and start caring about losing. 

[Archie Lee]

What does it mean to be playoffs or bust? Is it not possible to prioritize making the playoffs this year while still planning for the long-term?  I don’t see them as exclusive. The best teams in the NHL are often “all-in” year after year. Again: year after year. How many years in a row have Vegas, Colorado, Edmonton, Dallas, Boston, Tampa, Florida, Toronto and the Rangers been in the mix?  

Other than Dahlin, I don’t see that there is a single player that we have whose loss should be insurmountable in achieving the goal of being successful over the longterm (frankly, I’m not sure Dahlin is in that category either). 

That said, I don’t typically see things as black or white. There are scenarios where we could miss this year and I would argue that bringing back Adams makes sense. If a lot of the things that need to go right do go right, and we get to 91+ and miss by a point or two, I don’t think I will be arguing for Pegula to take another shot at hiring a new GM just yet. 

[dudacek]

57 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Fair enough. You are saying missing again would be a fail but the issue of whether the GM should be replaced doesn’t hinge on that. Because you fear the alternative path should Pegula go in another direction. I can’t agree, I can’t see things as being any worse and I stringently believe that, from where we are NOW (let’s leave 2021 aside, you are correct we also don’t see eye to eye there), opting for a long form build with a new GM would be insane. We are a year-over-year team right now re: reasonable feasibility of finding success.

the most salient distinction comes in your last line and it’s a very, very philosophical difference that we can probably draw a line to almost always when we disagree. We do have a different goal. When the goals are SO far apart as they are in this case (let’s be honest, making the playoffs is a 50/50 prop and winning the cup is unlikely straight up, there’s a chasm there) it’s somewhat surprising our stances aline as often as they do 

We are looking for different things; follow the team for different reasons  

No I'm not saying the bold either, at least not exactly.

Yes, if the Sabres put up 98 points next year with Dahlin and Tuch out for 60 games and still miss, I'd probably keep him on. But in most cases of a miss he'd need to go, not because he missed the playoffs, but because his plan failed.

Accumulating a critical mass of young talent and letting it grow and emerge at the same time together is a good plan: it's how most of the best franchises get built.

Generally speaking, if this core does not emerge this year, after 3-5 years pro, it's not because they were too young, it's because they weren't good enough or developed properly.

Like you always said about Murray, it's not the plan that was wrong, it was the execution.

Edited July 18 by dudacek

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

You underrate how easy it is to make the playoffs.

 

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

More likely you make it and have a few years of up and down in and out before it all comes together.

I'd just like to point out that the Carolina Panthers have been in the playoffs 6 years in row. Before that they missed 9 consecutive years.

• The Tampa Lightning have been in the playoffs 11 years in a row. Before that, they missed 5 out of 6.
• Toronto? 8 years in a row. Before that, they missed 10 of 11.
• Florida? 5 years in a row. Before that, they missed 6 of 7, and 16 of 18

Boston, Pittsburgh, Washington have been good for a long, long time

Sure, it's easy to make the playoffs in the eastern conference — once you're good.

Yes, making the playoffs like New jersey has — once out the past 6 years, 2 of the last 12 — is better than what the Sabres have done, but the Eastern conference is a collection of haves and have-nots, and has been for some time.

I wanna be a have.

Edited July 18 by dudacek

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

 

I'd just like to point out that the Carolina Panthers have been in the playoffs 6 years in row. Before that they missed 9 consecutive years.

• The Tampa Lightning have been in the playoffs 11 years in a row. Before that, they missed 5 out of 6.
• Toronto? 8 years in a row. Before that, they missed 10 of 11.
• Florida? 5 years in a row. Before that, they missed 6 of 7, and 16 of 18

Boston, Pittsburgh, Washington have been good for a long, long time

Sure, it's easy to make the playoffs in the eastern conference — once you're good.

No. It’s easy to make the playoffs. Listing drastic outliers that even then don’t compare to us doesn’t serve your case it belittles it

aside from Ottawa and Detroit, no eastern team has a playoff drought of more than 4 years. There’s only 2 teams at that mark, the vast majority are less than the amount Adams has achieved in JUST his tenure.

Washington made the playoffs last year with a -453 goal differential.

No matter how low the benchmark is you constantly are strapped to it with all your weight pulling downward.

if I’ve said this I’ve said it a million times: yes, Detroit and Ottawa are bad too and we are only like, twice as bad. write home about it

- - - 

Your arguments on this particular topic constantly fail because you can’t artificially lower the bar, no matter how hard you try, low enough to make an argument that makes their failure acceptable by even a single iota more. There are no mitigating factors for 13 years. For a failure that extreme. Even 1 playoff appearance in 5 years, 2 in 6… light years from what we’re done

its not hard to make the playoffs. It’s hard to miss as much as we have 

Edited July 18 by Thorny

[PerreaultForever]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

I'd just like to point out that the Carolina Panthers have been in the playoffs 6 years in row. Before that they missed 9 consecutive years.

• The Tampa Lightning have been in the playoffs 11 years in a row. Before that, they missed 5 out of 6.
• Toronto? 8 years in a row. Before that, they missed 10 of 11.
• Florida? 5 years in a row. Before that, they missed 6 of 7, and 16 of 18

Boston, Pittsburgh, Washington have been good for a long, long time

Sure, it's easy to make the playoffs in the eastern conference — once you're good.

Yes, making the playoffs like New jersey has — once out the past 6 years, 2 of the last 12 — is better than what the Sabres have done, but the Eastern conference is a collection of haves and have-nots, and has been for some time.

I wanna be a have.

I'm sure you do realize it's "easy to make the playoffs" for those teams because of the ineptitude of this team and a few others. Everything is relative. 

So to that point, which team(s) do you think we got better than they got better this off season? Who do you think we can pass now? 

[Thorny]

Calgary is in the bottom 10 for active playoff droughts 

they’ve missed 2 years in a row.

a fellow bottom 10 league team has a drought 7 times smaller 

1 minute ago, PerreaultForever said:

I'm sure you do realize it's "easy to make the playoffs" for those teams because of the ineptitude of this team and a few others. Everything is relative. 

So to that point, which team(s) do you think we got better than they got better this off season? Who do you think we can pass now? 

The bold is…That’s a heck of a point 

[dudacek]

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

Your arguments on this particular topic constantly fail because you can’t artificially lower the bar, no matter how hard you try, low enough to make an argument that makes their failure acceptable by even a single iota more. There are no mitigating factors for 13 years. For a failure that extreme. Even 1 playoff appearance in 5 years, 2 in 6… light years from what we’re done

its not hard to make the playoffs. It’s hard to miss as much as we have 

Maybe my arguments fail because you're having an entirely different discussion than I am?

My post had nothing to do with excusing the Sabres for being ***** — for Adams tenure, or the entire 13 years. I never suggested anything like the bold. You're not arguing with me.

My post was entirely in the context of the discussion that preceded it; I was describing why I want to "be good," not "just make the playoffs". It's not good enough to be Philadelphia in the East. I want to be the team that makes the playoffs 8 year in a row, not the one that makes it 2 out 12.

 

Edited July 18 by dudacek

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

Maybe my arguments fail because you're having an entirely different discussion than I am?

My post had nothing to do with excusing the Sabres for being ***** — for Adams tenure, or the entire 13 years. I never suggested anything like the bold. You're not arguing with me.

My post was entirely in the context of the discussion that preceded it; I was describing why I want to "be good," not "just make the playoffs". It's not good enough to be Philadelphia in the East. I want to be the team that makes the playoffs 8 year in a row, not the one that makes it 2 out 12.

 

I understand what you are saying about what the main goal should be for this franchise. Most of us agree with your point that not having serious aspirations to what your goal should be, in itself, is a disqualifying flaw.  Although I don't always agree with @Thorny there's an absurdity to not being able to qualify for the playoffs for 13 years. You cited Toronto not qualifying for a decade as being a team that also had a bad run. But the Sabres are worse than that ignominious run by three years, and still counting. 

The Washington Capitals won the Cup in 2018. Ever since they have been in a steady rebuild as the cup players have gotten older and have been phased out. And yet, they have made the playoffs in 5 of the past 6 years of roster changing. And if you include their cup crowning year up to today, they have been in the playoffs 13 out of 15 times.

The glaring reality is that the Sabres systemic failure is a result of their own mistakes, starting with the owner. The constant flux in the hockey operation caused consecutive rounds of instability. There should be no surprise with the outcome. I'm not a harsh critic of the GM. When he took over he laid out a roadmap and gave a direction to this aimless franchise, and for the most part he stuck with it. That's my problem with him. His inability to adjust when he had opportunities to do so. He simply was too cautious in his approach and willingness to deviate from his rebuilding plan. (My opinion.) Overall, he has done a good job this offseason in identifying structural problems with the roster, and then addressing them. He also made the right coaching decision, although the hiring process was a sham. What the GM did this offseason should have been done prior to last season. It was another lost opportunity. The continuing cycle of futility gets not only tiresome but more intolerable. 

In general, I agree with @Thorny's mind-set of being less tolerating and being more demanding. 

[dudacek]

I've seen a lot of people taking a forechecking 4th-line of Malenstyn-Lafferty-Aube-Kuble kinda for granted.

And while I like that line, I'm still kinda fixated on two things:

• I don't think the Sabres gave up a 2nd-round pick for Beck Malenstyn to play him 12 minutes a night on the 4th line
• I'm not going to force Don Granato deployments or Sabrespace prejudices onto Lindy Ruff.

What if Lindy is thinking of putting his three best defensive players together and running an old-school 3rd line checking line:

• Malenstyn McLeod Greenway

What if Malenstyn is tapped to be the hammer and the defensive conscience with more skill guys in the top 6, like Grier was:

• Malenstyn Cozens Quinn or Malenstyn Thompson Tuch

Not enough offence? Grier had 7 goals and 23 points in 81 games in '06 playing with Drury, who scored 30. Malenstyn had 6 and 21 in 81 games last year with Nick Dowd.

[dudacek]

Another player I'm really curious about after the off-season shuffle is Peyton Krebs.

The off-season changes and acquisition of McLeod has, in most people's minds, pushed him from a poor fit as 3C to a spare part as the 13th forward. Given his actions (and rumours of Krebs being trade bait) I'm inclined to think Kevyn Adams' post-season positive comments about Krebs to be utter bullspit.

But what if it wasn't?

I think Donnie Granato did a fine job of developing the young Sabres under his watch, but Krebs always seemed to be the lowest man on his totem pole. While guys like Peterka and Thompson kept getting given prime ice time and opportunities to "learn by doing", Krebs got treated like a normal rookie: bottom six minutes, bottom six linemates; keep your head down, skate hard and don't ***** up.

A thing that doesn't really get talked about much is how much his game has changed as a result. Remember, this was a kid, who, in his last year of junior, was playing a 1C role and putting up numbers like Matt Savoie. You can't always put a ton of emphasis on counting stats, but I think these numbers are reflective of how much Krebs has transformed in just two seasons:

• 2022: GP: 48, P: 22, +/-: -20, Hits: 19, Giveways: 31
• 2024: GP: 80, P: 17, +/-: +2, Hits: 108, Giveways: 13

I watched quite a bit of Krebs before he got to the NHL. The pace is similar, but he doesn't really look like the same player. The teenage Krebs loved to have the puck on his stick, was always around it, and was constantly looking to make plays. Last year's Krebs looked like your textbook NHL 4th-line centre: skate hard, hold the fort for 40 seconds, get off.

Don't get me wrong. At 20, Krebs was a turnover waiting to happen; he needed to learn how to be responsible with the puck and take care of the details because he was never going to be driving offence in the NHL.

But now that he's discovered a more responsible base — he's actually pretty good now defensively — I wonder if there's room to tap back into his offensive game.

And that's where Lindy Ruff comes in.

With his rough edges now smoothed, Krebs does seem like a Lindy-type player: competitive, plays fast, works, coachable. With no baggage, will Krebs be able to forge a new role under Lindy?

• Could we see him feeding Zucker or another shooter on a 2-way line, while the new guys handle the heavy lifting defensively?
• Could he move back to wing and carve out a role next to Cozens, like he did so well for Team Canada?
• Can he grow and expand his role as a 4C so he becomes, in effect, another version of what we think we are getting in McLeod

He's right at the crucial 200-game spot, with a new coach and a measure of opportunity in front him. it's a pivotal year for his career.

Personally, I don't think any of the above happens. I think the writing is on the wall for him in Buffalo. He plays a fair amount in the bottom 6, gets moved to another team, and goes onto a decent career as a 3rd-liner elsewhere.

But it's July, and it's fun to think about possibilities.

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

I've seen a lot of people taking a forechecking 4th-line of Malenstyn-Lafferty-Aube-Kuble kinda for granted.

And while I like that line, I'm still kinda fixated on two things:

• I don't think the Sabres gave up a 2nd-round pick for Beck Malenstyn to play him 12 minutes a night on the 4th line
• I'm not going to force Don Granato deployments or Sabrespace prejudices onto Lindy Ruff.

What if Lindy is thinking of putting his three best defensive players together and running an old-school 3rd line checking line:

• Malenstyn McLeod Greenway

What if Malenstyn is tapped to be the hammer and the defensive conscience with more skill guys in the top 6, like Grier was:

• Malenstyn Cozens Quinn or Malenstyn Thompson Tuch

Not enough offence? Grier had 7 goals and 23 points in 81 games in '06 playing with Drury, who scored 30. Malenstyn had 6 and 21 in 81 games last year with Nick Dowd.

3 best defensive players? Kubel might be the best defensive player on the team. I think writing off the only addition who plays specifically rw, is a mistake. 

V.

 

 

[LGR4GM]

Lafferty

 

Greenway

McLeod 

 

 

Edited July 20 by LGR4GM

[triumph_communes]

The ‘4th’ line will get 2nd most minutes matching up against top lines.

 

we have enough scoring elsewhere in the line up that this will work out okay 

Edited July 20 by triumph_communes