mjd1001 Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 (edited) I was curious to look at the roster and see what differences will be made this year vs last year opening the season. Compared to game #1 last year vs what we expect this year: -New to the forward group game 1: Quinn (was hurt last year), Zucker, Mcleod, Malenstyn, Lafferty, Aube-Kubel Out from forwards: Krebs (likely), Okposo, Zemgus, Mitts, Skinner, VO -New to defense: Byram (in for E. Johnson) -New to goal: UPL (he didn't dress for the opener last year he was the #3 guy at the time) Coaching: Ruff and Appert are the 2 main guys of course, both changes from last year. So, going into game #1, 50% different lineup in forwards, 17% difference on D. New starting Goalie. Of the 19 players that should play on any given game, 11 will be the same and 8 will be different from last years team (42% turnover from last year's game 1), and a new coaching staff too. Edited October 1 by mjd1001 4 Quote
dudacek Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 I've talked a bit about this roster maybe reaching critical mass in terms of talent and age. I've never really fully bought into the "guys who know how to win" thing but if it's real i wonder if reached a point where it could make a difference. Zucker played beside Crosby, McLeod with McDavid. Byram and Aube-Kubel won a cup with Colorado. Lafferty was also with the Penguins and was part of the Vancouver turnaround last year. Johnson is the only departure who had any sort of track record with excellence. Five of the six departing forwards had never played a playoff game. 7 Quote
GASabresIUFAN Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 (edited) 23 minutes ago, dudacek said: Five of the six departing forwards had never played a playoff game. Not an accurate statement. KO played 24 playoffs games for the NYI (and won a Cup with Fla playing in 17 playoffs games last season) Jost played 46 playoffs games for Colo/Minn Robinson played 10 playoff games for CBJ VO, Mitts, Z and Skinner had no playoff experience, but 3 of the 4 grew up in the sad Sabres organization. As soon Mitts escaped he put up 9 pts in 11 playoff games for the AVS. Playoff experience may or may not be meaningful, but the problems with this organization went far beyond players without playoff experience. Starting with bad coaching and poor management. Put any of the departed guys in the right situation and they'd be fine in the playoffs as Mitts & KO just proved. The most important part of the turnover is whether the new players make us better. If the new 4th line can help tilt the ice in our direction by their fast hitting style then it's going to be a positive change. Edited October 1 by GASabresIUFAN 3 Quote
PerreaultForever Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 The optimist in me says the young high skilled forwards will continue to improve and mostly excel and we will have 2 solid top lines. The D isn't perfect but it's deeper. highly mobile and highly skilled and thus should help drive the play. UPL will continue to develop his consistency and be as good or better than last year and Levi will also be NHL able as a 25-30ish game back up. The bottom six will have good chemistry and bring more physicality and compete than we have had in the past. Ruff will game manage well like a real NHL coach does. The pessimist in me thinks our top forwards were overrated, Thompson is what he was last year not the year before. Cozens is also no better than last year and Quinn isn't as good as people think. Zucker is a has been and will be Okposo level at best. The third line won't gel and the 4th line, although fast and adequately aggressive against weaker competition will fall apart against the top competition who have also gotten heavier and bigger as a general trend. The D will be good moving the puck but will still be horrible in their own end and in and around the paint. UPL will drop back to inconsistency and Levi will not be ready and show clear weaknesses. Ruff won't really make a difference and some players might not respond well to him when he demands more. Either is possible. Likely, it'll be a mix of both and that may or may not get us there. Quote
mjd1001 Posted October 1 Author Report Posted October 1 (edited) There is reason for optimism. It may not guarantee the playoffs, but anyone looking toward the good side of things can find legit reasons: -2 years ago missed the playoffs by one win -last year were a positive goal differential. In recent years 95%+ of teams in the east with a positive goal differential made the playoffs. -Took them a while to settle on UPL, but once they did, the team was close to a top 10 team in the league, and not just over 10-15 games, we are talking 40-50+ games. From January 1 to the end of the season (44 games, more than half the season) they were 24-18-2, with a plus 24 goal differential. Thats very close to the time the settled on UPL as their starter (he started 39% of the games before Jan 1, after Jan 1 the started 81% of the games) -Tage played hurt for a lot of the year. The part of the year closer to his injury his production was way down. As he got farther from it, he started producing a lot more, basically at the level of the 2 years before. Since being made a center, tage had 2 full seasons that were great, one half season bad and another half season close to great. The only 'bad' stretch was when he was hurt. -Coaching? If you think Ruff is better than Granato (many do), if nothing else changed, that should be a net positive. Again, none of this means you are making the playoffs, but if someone is being positive, this year its not grasping at straws, those are just a few of the legitimate reasons to be positive. Edited October 1 by mjd1001 3 Quote
TheAud Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 22 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: The pessimist in me thinks our top forwards were overrated, Thompson is what he was last year not the year before. Do you mean what he was the prior two years? He scored 29 goals in 71 games last year. That's a 31-32 goals-in-78 game pace. The prior two seasons he played 78 games each year and scored 47 and 38 goals. Is it possible in his age 27 season this year that he is already declining and we have already seen peak Tage? Sure, but it seems unlikely. If he stays healthy I'd bet a steak dinner Thompson is good for 35+ this year, and more likely 40. 2 Quote
Derrico Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 It's a couple of days before the season opener. Despite wishing they brought in one more top 6 forward, I think there's plenty of reason for optimism. Tuch / Thompson / Peterka is a legitimate top line for a playoff team Benson / Cozens / Quinn has so much potential. Could be just as fun as Peterka Quinn Cozens from two years ago Zucker / McLeod / Greenway is one of the better projected third lines we've had in a long time Malenstyn / Lafferty / Aube-Kubel comprises of legitimate 4th line NHLers who excel at playing a defensive game rather than the washed up NHL/AHL tweeners we've been running out the past few years. No doubt Lindy had a say in who he wanted to bring in. Should be much improved from a roster construction standpoint. The Defense looks to be deeper than past years and OP is another year older now. Lots of potential in the top 3 of Dahlin, Byram and Power Many thought Levi was the savior last year but its tough making the jump from juniors. A professional year under his belt now and he is going in as the backup if he remains with the big club. As Thorny (Thorner?) said, betting odds are UPL is who he was last season, particularly if they play tighter D under Ruff. It'll come down to health. We can't afford to lose any top players (especially top 6) for any length of time. But the critical mass of drafting high and developing has arrived. I sure hope it doesn't go poorly because most of our key contributors are home grown and finally at the age/experience that they should be difference makers. 4 1 Quote
Dr. Who Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said: The optimist in me says the young high skilled forwards will continue to improve and mostly excel and we will have 2 solid top lines. The D isn't perfect but it's deeper. highly mobile and highly skilled and thus should help drive the play. UPL will continue to develop his consistency and be as good or better than last year and Levi will also be NHL able as a 25-30ish game back up. The bottom six will have good chemistry and bring more physicality and compete than we have had in the past. Ruff will game manage well like a real NHL coach does. The pessimist in me thinks our top forwards were overrated, Thompson is what he was last year not the year before. Cozens is also no better than last year and Quinn isn't as good as people think. Zucker is a has been and will be Okposo level at best. The third line won't gel and the 4th line, although fast and adequately aggressive against weaker competition will fall apart against the top competition who have also gotten heavier and bigger as a general trend. The D will be good moving the puck but will still be horrible in their own end and in and around the paint. UPL will drop back to inconsistency and Levi will not be ready and show clear weaknesses. Ruff won't really make a difference and some players might not respond well to him when he demands more. Either is possible. Likely, it'll be a mix of both and that may or may not get us there. C'mon, this is fake news. 1 Quote
dudacek Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 (edited) 2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said: Not an accurate statement. KO played 24 playoffs games for the NYI (and won a Cup with Fla playing in 17 playoffs games last season) Jost played 46 playoffs games for Colo/Minn Robinson played 10 playoff games for CBJ VO, Mitts, Z and Skinner had no playoff experience, but 3 of the 4 grew up in the sad Sabres organization. As soon Mitts escaped he put up 9 pts in 11 playoff games for the AVS. Playoff experience may or may not be meaningful, but the problems with this organization went far beyond players without playoff experience. Starting with bad coaching and poor management. Put any of the departed guys in the right situation and they'd be fine in the playoffs as Mitts & KO just proved. The most important part of the turnover is whether the new players make us better. If the new 4th line can help tilt the ice in our direction by their fast hitting style then it's going to be a positive change. I was referring to the six missing opening night players (Krebs (likely), Okposo, Zemgus, Mitts, Skinner, VO) in the opening post. So entirely accurate. 😘 Edited October 1 by dudacek Quote
PerreaultForever Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 1 hour ago, TheAud said: Do you mean what he was the prior two years? He scored 29 goals in 71 games last year. That's a 31-32 goals-in-78 game pace. The prior two seasons he played 78 games each year and scored 47 and 38 goals. Is it possible in his age 27 season this year that he is already declining and we have already seen peak Tage? Sure, but it seems unlikely. If he stays healthy I'd bet a steak dinner Thompson is good for 35+ this year, and more likely 40. Well that's the question isn't it? How many goals does Thompson have to score for that line to be a competing top NHL line? Is 30 enough? Does he need to be nearer 40? If Tuch stays the same, and Quinn and Benson give us as much as Skinner and Benson with Peterka staying Peterka it comes back to Cozens being better. I honestly have reservations about looking at past years because this team should be playing different hockey and that will benefit some more than others but we shall see who excels and who does not. Quote
PerreaultForever Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 54 minutes ago, Dr. Who said: C'mon, this is fake news. I'm literally torn on this team. 50/50 so I will admit I really have no idea how this shakes out this year. It truly could go either way. I do generally post more negative. I've never denied that. Areas of critique are where the conversations are in hockey. Rah rah when things go well is all too easy and for me, kind of boring. Much less to talk about when things go well. So come on Sabres, shut me up. 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted October 1 Author Report Posted October 1 6 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: Well that's the question isn't it? How many goals does Thompson have to score for that line to be a competing top NHL line? Is 30 enough? Does he need to be nearer 40? If Tuch stays the same, and Quinn and Benson give us as much as Skinner and Benson with Peterka staying Peterka it comes back to Cozens being better. I honestly have reservations about looking at past years because this team should be playing different hockey and that will benefit some more than others but we shall see who excels and who does not. That is the one thing I cannot wrap my head around. Well, not the only thing but the biggest thing. All else being equal, if healthy I think Tage gets close to 50 this year, but there are 2 things there. #1, IF healthy. #2, how will Ruff's coaching style/changes in the system impact each player. If he was healthy and Granato was back, yeah, 50 for me would be what I would expect from Tage. However, with Ruff, what if he wants/asks Tage to distribute more? What if he wants the forwards to not always go in as deep which will help the defense but take away a few quality attempts? That is the stuff we will soon see. Quote
Dr. Who Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 35 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: I'm literally torn on this team. 50/50 so I will admit I really have no idea how this shakes out this year. It truly could go either way. I do generally post more negative. I've never denied that. Areas of critique are where the conversations are in hockey. Rah rah when things go well is all too easy and for me, kind of boring. Much less to talk about when things go well. So come on Sabres, shut me up. You're generally correct. Just poking fun. I'm guardedly optimistic, because I think there is sufficient reason to be hopeful. We're going to need good fortune and stay relatively healthy. Ruff brought some much needed common sense back. I think our young team is ready for a competent, demanding coach. 2 Quote
SHAAAUGHT!!! Posted October 1 Report Posted October 1 2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said: The optimist in me says the young high skilled forwards will continue to improve and mostly excel and we will have 2 solid top lines. The D isn't perfect but it's deeper. highly mobile and highly skilled and thus should help drive the play. UPL will continue to develop his consistency and be as good or better than last year and Levi will also be NHL able as a 25-30ish game back up. The bottom six will have good chemistry and bring more physicality and compete than we have had in the past. Ruff will game manage well like a real NHL coach does. The pessimist in me thinks our top forwards were overrated, Thompson is what he was last year not the year before. Cozens is also no better than last year and Quinn isn't as good as people think. Zucker is a has been and will be Okposo level at best. The third line won't gel and the 4th line, although fast and adequately aggressive against weaker competition will fall apart against the top competition who have also gotten heavier and bigger as a general trend. The D will be good moving the puck but will still be horrible in their own end and in and around the paint. UPL will drop back to inconsistency and Levi will not be ready and show clear weaknesses. Ruff won't really make a difference and some players might not respond well to him when he demands more. Either is possible. Likely, it'll be a mix of both and that may or may not get us there. I’m not as worried about the forwards being overrated. Maybe they are on this board, but I think league-wide they are ranked appropriately. Most commentators have us on the cusps of playoffs (slightly in or slightly out). My main concern is injuries. I’m not sure this team could overcome another long-term injury to Tage, Tuch, or Quinn (or peterka bu5”t he hasn’t had the injury history the other had). This is why I wish we had signed another top 6 forward… Quote
PerreaultForever Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 3 hours ago, mjd1001 said: That is the one thing I cannot wrap my head around. Well, not the only thing but the biggest thing. All else being equal, if healthy I think Tage gets close to 50 this year, but there are 2 things there. #1, IF healthy. #2, how will Ruff's coaching style/changes in the system impact each player. If he was healthy and Granato was back, yeah, 50 for me would be what I would expect from Tage. However, with Ruff, what if he wants/asks Tage to distribute more? What if he wants the forwards to not always go in as deep which will help the defense but take away a few quality attempts? That is the stuff we will soon see. My opinion. What we will see from Ruff's team (assuming they listen to him), high tempo, multiple players going to the netfront and more forecheck than with granato hockey. How Thompson fits into that personally idk, we shall see. I think the main (overly simplistic outline here for brevity) is the D will be relied upon to move the puck up the ice, they will be told to shoot more and the forwards will be asked to screen and tip. Simple, basic hockey. Quote
TheAud Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said: Well that's the question isn't it? How many goals does Thompson have to score for that line to be a competing top NHL line? Is 30 enough? Does he need to be nearer 40? If Tuch stays the same, and Quinn and Benson give us as much as Skinner and Benson with Peterka staying Peterka it comes back to Cozens being better. I honestly have reservations about looking at past years because this team should be playing different hockey and that will benefit some more than others but we shall see who excels and who does not. In terms of being a competitive top line I am more worried about the Thompson-Peterka-Tuch lines defensive play than I am whether they will score enough goals. Like I said, I'd be shocked if a healthy Thompson is less than 35. Peterka's career trajectory is still early but he's at least a consistent 20+ goal scorer with potential for 30+. Tuch is what he is at this point, but that's pretty good so long as they learn to play tougher in their own end. We'll see. Quote
PerreaultForever Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 1 hour ago, TheAud said: In terms of being a competitive top line I am more worried about the Thompson-Peterka-Tuch lines defensive play than I am whether they will score enough goals. Like I said, I'd be shocked if a healthy Thompson is less than 35. Peterka's career trajectory is still early but he's at least a consistent 20+ goal scorer with potential for 30+. Tuch is what he is at this point, but that's pretty good so long as they learn to play tougher in their own end. We'll see. I'm not worried about that. Top offensive lines are rarely great defensively. The Perfection Line might have been an exception but even guys like McKinnon and Crosby have defensive lapses. 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted October 2 Author Report Posted October 2 (edited) On 10/2/2024 at 12:40 AM, PerreaultForever said: I'm not worried about that. Top offensive lines are rarely great defensively. The Perfection Line might have been an exception but even guys like McKinnon and Crosby have defensive lapses. I think they will be 'balanced' enough. -Tuch is probably the best forchecker on the team. -Tage might be better than we think or some number say because he usually isn't out of position, and with his size and reach, he covers a lot of territory. I said in other threads, its kinda like a DB playing zone coverage in the NFL. He doesn't need to look like he's doing much, just hold our position and take up space. -Peterka? I noticed some plays last year where he did have giveaways or made bad decisions in the D-zone. But, can he be better than Skinner was on this line? Hopefully yes. Edited October 3 by mjd1001 1 Quote
dudacek Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 1 minute ago, mjd1001 said: I think they will be 'balanced' enough. -Tuch is probably the best forchecker in the league. -Tage might be better than we think or some number say because he usually isn't out of position, and with his size and reach, he covers a lot of territory. I said in other threads, its kinda like a DB playing zone coverage in the NFL. He doesn't need to look like he's doing much, just hold our position and take up space. -Peterka? I noticed some plays last year where he did have giveaways or made bad decisions in the D-zone. But, can he be better than Skinner was on this line? Hopefully yes. The Athletic preview article in another thread says Tage made a dramatic improvement in his defensive analytics last year. 1 Quote
PerreaultForever Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 4 hours ago, mjd1001 said: I think they will be 'balanced' enough. -Tuch is probably the best forchecker in the league. -Tage might be better than we think or some number say because he usually isn't out of position, and with his size and reach, he covers a lot of territory. I said in other threads, its kinda like a DB playing zone coverage in the NFL. He doesn't need to look like he's doing much, just hold our position and take up space. -Peterka? I noticed some plays last year where he did have giveaways or made bad decisions in the D-zone. But, can he be better than Skinner was on this line? Hopefully yes. Ummm, no. Just, no. I like Tuch a lot, but that's just a silly statement to make. Best forechecker in the league? Tough question. many candidates. Crosby's still pretty darn good at it. At the moment without diving too deep I'd probably say Bennett. 1 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted October 2 Author Report Posted October 2 (edited) 48 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: Ummm, no. Just, no. I like Tuch a lot, but that's just a silly statement to make. Best forechecker in the league? Tough question. many candidates. Crosby's still pretty darn good at it. At the moment without diving too deep I'd probably say Bennett. I meant to say "Team", not league. I will correct it/edit it, but at the moment for some reason I cannot edit that post? Edited October 2 by mjd1001 1 Quote
Thorner Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 (edited) On 10/1/2024 at 3:14 PM, dudacek said: I've talked a bit about this roster maybe reaching critical mass in terms of talent and age. I've never really fully bought into the "guys who know how to win" thing but if it's real i wonder if reached a point where it could make a difference. Zucker played beside Crosby, McLeod with McDavid. Byram and Aube-Kubel won a cup with Colorado. Lafferty was also with the Penguins and was part of the Vancouver turnaround last year. Johnson is the only departure who had any sort of track record with excellence. Five of the six departing forwards had never played a playoff game. Your system is way too heavily biased if Skinner goes in the bad category and Lafferty and Aube-Kubel are in the good, relatively. What are we doing here? Like you are comparing track records and your conclusion is that Skinner’s is worse than the guys we brought in? You get that Skinner is better NOW than those players, never mind in his prime? I mention prime because you specifically said “track record” On 10/1/2024 at 3:28 PM, GASabresIUFAN said: Not an accurate statement. KO played 24 playoffs games for the NYI (and won a Cup with Fla playing in 17 playoffs games last season) Jost played 46 playoffs games for Colo/Minn Robinson played 10 playoff games for CBJ VO, Mitts, Z and Skinner had no playoff experience, but 3 of the 4 grew up in the sad Sabres organization. As soon Mitts escaped he put up 9 pts in 11 playoff games for the AVS. Playoff experience may or may not be meaningful, but the problems with this organization went far beyond players without playoff experience. Starting with bad coaching and poor management. Put any of the departed guys in the right situation and they'd be fine in the playoffs as Mitts & KO just proved. The most important part of the turnover is whether the new players make us better. If the new 4th line can help tilt the ice in our direction by their fast hitting style then it's going to be a positive change. Was such an odd skewing of data, flabbergasting even Edited October 2 by Thorner Quote
Thorner Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 21 hours ago, PerreaultForever said: I'm literally torn on this team. 50/50 so I will admit I really have no idea how this shakes out this year. It truly could go either way. I do generally post more negative. I've never denied that. Areas of critique are where the conversations are in hockey. Rah rah when things go well is all too easy and for me, kind of boring. Much less to talk about when things go well. So come on Sabres, shut me up. 2 teams spending the way we do have made the playoffs in the last decade. We are all incredible homers for saying they are 50/50 to make it. Logically it’s a bad prediction. If it turns out right, it’ll still have been a bad prediction. The only reasonable projection right now, talking gun to head, is for them to miss. Of course it is. We just choose to have hope because it’s sports and it doesn’t really matter Quote
dudacek Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 20 minutes ago, Thorner said: Your system is way too heavily biased if Skinner goes in the bad category and Lafferty and Aube-Kubel are in the good, relatively. What are we doing here? Like you are comparing track records and your conclusion is that Skinner’s is worse than the guys we brought in? You get that Skinner is better NOW than those players, never mind in his prime? I mention prime because you specifically said “track record” Was such an odd skewing of data, flabbergasting even I find this post as bizarre as @GASabresIUFAN's I looked at @mjd1001's list of players who left and came in and the first thing that I noticed was that most of the players coming in had experience with winning programs and most of the people who left didn't. I shared that, along with the suggestion that I kinda doubt it was meaningful. There's no argument being presented or data being skewed. It was a simple offhand reaction to the opening post. System? Skinner is better than Aube-Kubel? What the heck are you talking about? Quote
Thorner Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 (edited) 11 minutes ago, dudacek said: I find this post as bizarre as @GASabresIUFAN's I looked at @mjd1001's list of players who left and came in and the first thing that I noticed was that most of the players coming in had experience with winning programs and most of the people who left didn't. I shared that, along with the suggestion that I kinda doubt it was meaningful. There's no argument being presented or data being skewed. It was a simple offhand reaction to the opening post. System? Skinner is better than Aube-Kubel? What the heck are you talking about? Really? I’m saying your use of “track record of excellence” is poorly, wantonly applied, and to the wrong players Though I realize now you said “with” excellence which does alter it. lol - admittedly, my mistake. Still, I disagree thoroughly with the subtext, the suggestion of your post, regardless of where you come down on it: no, I don’t think we benefit due to the “track record with excellence” of the players we brought in relative to the ones we sent out: it would be an incredibly small factor, if a factor at all, relative to the talent comp Edited October 2 by Thorner Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.