Reviewing Adams' Off-season acquisitions at the half way mark

[Archie Lee]

7 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Yet we have one of the worst PK in the NHL.  Maybe the problem is bigger than one player?  Maybe that player isn’t as effective on the PK as alleged? 
 

 

I think it is bigger than one player. Watch the 5 on 3 Anaheim PP at the start of the 1st. 5 on 3 is tough, obviously, but Tuch was playing far too high. Cross ice passes between the forward and D on an 5 on 3 PP should be very hard to make. I just don’t recall seeing a team defend a 5 on 3 like that. 

Your McLeod hill is a strange one to me. Nobody is saying he is a star. He has undeniably been an effective player though. There was speculation earlier this year that the Sabres and Penguins were looking at swapping a young NHL ready player (players?) for Rust. I think Rust, McLeod, Tuch, would be one of the league’s fastest lines and could easily be a good 2nd line on a playoff team. 

[JohnC]

25 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Agree with most of this.  It was definitely the younger players that hurt the team, especially Cozens, Power, Samuelsson, and Quinn.  Peterka inconsistent.   Benson is not finding the scoresheet and now a 4th liner with Krebs.  

Byram had some up and down play.  All defenseman have better numbers when paired with Dahlin.  Most telling is Byram and Power did not step up when Dahlin was hurt.  That was a big part of the 13 game losing streak.  Our defense needs better defensive players.  

Zucker started the season on the 3rd line but has been a strong contributor anywhere he played.   How much will we overpay to keep him and how much is left in the tank?  

McLeod was in Ruff’s dog house for a while and played 4th line while minutes were given to Cozens and Krebs. I  don’t know why either.  

Abe Kubel and Lafferty did not contribute much but Malenstyn did  

Kulich was a big positive.  His centering the top line says a lot about our center strength, or lack there of. 
 
They cannot roll this back.  They need a top 6 center and a RHD that plays defense.  

You smartly targeted the young group that has not stepped it up to the expectation as being the underlying reason for in general has been a disappointing season. On the other hand, there has been an uptick in play in members of that particular group. Cozens, Power, Sammy and Quinn have been playing better. They certainly are not making quantum leaps forward but over the last half dozen games or so their play has improved. Cozens was the first star last night. And he deserved that accolade. Quin has also recently played better. Not dramatically so, but better. I thought Samuelsson played really well last night. He was positionally sound and played within the structure. Much of his malaise most likely can be attributed to him being constantly hurt. 

Will the organization mostly bring back this group? Probably so, especially if the Sabres continue to play better. But as you point out with your last sentence, what needs to happen to meaningfully improve this team is making the few required moves (not necessarily dramatic moves) at the positions you noted to make this team a more serious team. 

Side note: Kulich is a bright prospect. The issue I have is whether he can be a legitimate #2C and address that critical need, assuming Tage goes back to #1C? That would be a big risk entering next season. My preference would be to go out and get a #2C. We have the assets to make a deal without creating other big needs.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

13 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Or our coaches play a 3rd period “protect the lead” game that the players are not capable of playing.  

The fall starts in the second period.  

We have scored 67 goals in the first.  It then drops to 54 in the second and we have now scored 57 in the 3rd.

We have only allowed 42 1st period goals.  That numbers jumps to 71 in the second and 71 in the 3rd.

It’s pretty clear that our performance as a team falls off in the 2nd and then carries over into the 3rd.  

 

[mjd1001]

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You smartly targeted the young group that has not stepped it up to the expectation as being the underlying reason for in general has been a disappointing season. On the other hand, there has been an uptick in play in members of that particular group. Cozens, Power, Sammy and Quinn have been playing better. They certainly are not making quantum leaps forward but over the last half dozen games or so their play has improved. Cozens was the first star last night. And he deserved that accolade. Quin has also recently played better. Not dramatically so, but better. I thought Samuelsson played really well last night. He was positionally sound and played within the structure. Much of his malaise most likely can be attributed to him being constantly hurt. 

Will the organization mostly bring back this group? Probably so, especially if the Sabres continue to play better. But as you point out with your last sentence, what needs to happen to meaningfully improve this team is making the few required moves (not necessarily dramatic moves) at the positions you noted to make this team a more serious team. 

Side note: Kulich is a bright prospect. The issue I have is whether he can be a legitimate #2C and address that critical need, assuming Tage goes back to #1C? That would be a big risk entering next season. My preference would be to go out and get a #2C. We have the assets to make a deal without creating other big needs.  

Kulich is probably best served as the #3C next year.  That begs the question, is Cozens playing better recently now good enough to pencil him in as the long term solution at #2C?  If Cozens is not traded, and if he isn't move to wing (2 things that the Sabres have shown no sign of doing)....will most be happy with him at 2C long term?

Edited 12 hours ago by mjd1001

[_Q_]

5 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Kulich is probably best served as the #3C next year.  That begs the question, is Cozens playing better recently now good enough to pencil him in as the long term solution at #2C?  If Cozens is not traded, and if he isn't move to wing (2 things that the Sabres have shown no sign of doing)....will most be happy with him at 2C long term?

The rest of the season I would like to see the following

Peterka-Tage-Tuch

Quinn-Kulich-Cozens

Zucker-McLeod-Greenway

Benson-Krebs-Malenstyn

[Pimlach]

40 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Kulich is probably best served as the #3C next year.  That begs the question, is Cozens playing better recently now good enough to pencil him in as the long term solution at #2C?  If Cozens is not traded, and if he isn't move to wing (2 things that the Sabres have shown no sign of doing)....will most be happy with him at 2C long term?

No to your question.  The Sabres need to stop cherry picking the results an look at the entire body of work.  Cozens is not a good center.  There is enough data out there and enough video to support that.  Move him to wing or move him. 
 

 

[Pimlach]

40 minutes ago, _Q_ said:

The rest of the season I would like to see the following

Peterka-Tage-Tuch

Quinn-Kulich-Cozens

Zucker-McLeod-Greenway

Benson-Krebs-Malenstyn

Why put a big load on a rookie, Kulich, when he is thriving centering Tage?   

I think that 2nd line hurts Kulich.  Moving Tuch down with Cozens and Quinn helps them by providing adult supervision.  

[mjd1001]

1 hour ago, _Q_ said:

The rest of the season I would like to see the following

Peterka-Tage-Tuch

Quinn-Kulich-Cozens

Zucker-McLeod-Greenway

Benson-Krebs-Malenstyn

I like those lines a lot, the only thing I'd do, if your order has purpose, is to move the McLeod line up a spot and drop the Kulich line down a spot.

I'd want, on average the McLeod led line getting 1-2 more even strength minutes per game than the Kulich-Cozens one.  Either that or you might have to consider having Kulich play with at least one more 'veteran' guy on his wing.

Edited 11 hours ago by mjd1001

[_Q_]

3 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Why put a big load on a rookie, Kulich, when he is thriving centering Tage?   

I think that 2nd line hurts Kulich.  Moving Tuch down with Cozens and Quinn helps them by providing adult supervision.  

In my mind the goal would be twofold, seeing how Cozens would respond to playing wing and seeing if Kulich might be able to anchor 2c for next season.

In my mind Kulich should not be a 1C and Cozens shouldn't be a C altogether.

2 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

I like those lines a lot, the only thing I'd do, if your order has purpose, is to move the McLeod line up a spot and drop the Kulich line down a spot.

I'd want, on average the McLeod led line getting 1-2 more even strength minutes per game than the Kulich-Cozens one.  Either that or you might have to consider having Kulich play with at least one more 'veteran' guy on his wing.

I like this as well.

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

Kulich is probably best served as the #3C next year.  That begs the question, is Cozens playing better recently now good enough to pencil him in as the long term solution at #2C?  If Cozens is not traded, and if he isn't move to wing (2 things that the Sabres have shown no sign of doing)....will most be happy with him at 2C long term?

As far as Cozens being a long term solution at #2C, I would say no for the reasons that have often been stated by me and others. I strongly believe that he is most suited to be a winger on the second line. Cozens has recently received a lot of merited criticisms for his play this season. It's evident that he has been pressing since the extension and assistant captain designation. And let's not forget that a couple of seasons ago he had 31 goals and 37 assists for 68 pts. Those numbers should not be dismissed when considering whether to keep him or trade him. Last night, he showed that he can be an asset for this team. My fear is that if dealt he would fall into the category of dealt young players who thrived in better run organizations. 

[mjd1001]

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

As far as Cozens being a long term solution at #2C, I would say no for the reasons that have often been stated by me and others. I strongly believe that he is most suited to be a winger on the second line. Cozens has recently received a lot of merited criticisms for his play this season. It's evident that he has been pressing since the extension and assistant captain designation. And let's not forget that a couple of seasons ago he had 31 goals and 37 assists for 68 pts. Those numbers should not be dismissed when considering whether to keep him or trade him. Last night, he showed that he can be an asset for this team. My fear is that if dealt he would fall into the category of dealt young players who thrived in better run organizations. 

I hear what you say, and the reason I criticize Cozens and still don't know his value is....that season 3 years ago, is it repeated?

He shot 15% that year, but every other year he has shot in the single digits.  When you break down that season, it wasn't even the whole season. Almost half of his goals that year came in about a 8-10 week stretch where he shot nearly 20%.  And when you break down that season even further, despite that offensive production, his line was still on the ice for more goals allowed then they scored.

I don't know.  I fall into the camp that his best season MIGHT be repeatable, or it might not, but it isn't the norm.  I think he is, and has always been awful defensively and away from the puck...yet now we have a period of about 10 games where that has improved.  He hasn't been stellar, but most of the obvious gaffs are gone. Is this a permanent step up in his play?

I can't figure him out.

[JohnC]

19 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I hear what you say, and the reason I criticize Cozens and still don't know his value is....that season 3 years ago, is it repeated?

He shot 15% that year, but every other year he has shot in the single digits.  When you break down that season, it wasn't even the whole season. Almost half of his goals that year came in about a 8-10 week stretch where he shot nearly 20%.  And when you break down that season even further, despite that offensive production, his line was still on the ice for more goals allowed then they scored.

I don't know.  I fall into the camp that his best season MIGHT be repeatable, or it might not, but it isn't the norm.  I think he is, and has always been awful defensively and away from the puck...yet now we have a period of about 10 games where that has improved.  He hasn't been stellar, but most of the obvious gaffs are gone. Is this a permanent step up in his play?

I can't figure him out.

I'm more optimistic about him as a player than you appear to be. However, I'm making that judgment with some reservations. I'd be a blind fool to be overly confident with an excessive optimistic prognostication. 

The mistake that this GM has made (my opinion) is that his expectations for the young core were too high, at least for the short term. The GM needed to add another Zuker and Greenway type veteran players to better support them. As an example, Greenway is far from being an elite player. Yet, his tough presence and smart play has had a positive effect on the players he is playing with. We needed a couple to few more of those players on the roster when the season started. 

We'll see how it goes. In general, as the recent record demonstrates, the overall play has been better. That's encouraging. 

[Doohicksie]

5 hours ago, _Q_ said:

The rest of the season I would like to see the following

Peterka-Tage-Tuch

Quinn-Kulich-Cozens

Zucker-McLeod-Greenway

Benson-Krebs-Malenstyn

And you could flip Lines 2 and 3 depending on who's rolling and how physical the competition is.

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, _Q_ said:

In my mind the goal would be twofold, seeing how Cozens would respond to playing wing and seeing if Kulich might be able to anchor 2c for next season.

In my mind Kulich should not be a 1C and Cozens shouldn't be a C altogether.

I like this as well.

If you’re evaluating a player, Kulich in this example, there is tons of data out there that shows playing him with Cozens is a bad choice.   

Kulich played wing in Rochester, he was moved to center because there was no one else and Lindy was desperate and experimenting.  He already is a better center than Cozens.  Tage is scoring while playing with Kulich, I would not change that at this point. 

 I can agree that Kulich is not a 1C, no one on this really team is. 

[_Q_]

7 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

If you’re evaluating a player, Kulich in this example, there is tons of data out there that shows playing him with Cozens is a bad choice.   

Kulich played wing in Rochester, he was moved to center because there was no one else and Lindy was desperate and experimenting.  He already is a better center than Cozens.  Tage is scoring while playing with Kulich, I would not change that at this point. 

 I can agree that Kulich is not a 1C, no one on this really team is. 

My lineup has Kulich at center and Cozens at wing.  Maybe you overlooked that.

There isn’t any data out there showing anything about someone playing with Cozens as a wing, cause it’s never happened.

I like how Kulich looks as a C, just don’t think he is ready for 1C

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

If you’re evaluating a player, Kulich in this example, there is tons of data out there that shows playing him with Cozens is a bad choice.   

Kulich played wing in Rochester, he was moved to center because there was no one else and Lindy was desperate and experimenting.  He already is a better center than Cozens.  Tage is scoring while playing with Kulich, I would not change that at this point. 

 I can agree that Kulich is not a 1C, no one on this really team is. 

Why are you reluctant to categorize Tage as a 1C? It seems to me that a JJP/Tage/Tuch with other variations at wing is a solid one line. The bigger issue is how is the second line going to be constructed. I would put Cozens at wing on the second line and go from there. I would prefer acquiring a quality 2C from the market but not sure that is a reasonable expectation. 

[PerreaultForever]

6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

It could be that the Sabres come out hard and fast and their effort and attention to detail then fall off as the grind of the game continues?  It’s kind of like a sugar high to start the game and once the sugar gets out of their system they crash and go to sleep.  
or

It also could be that good teams don’t take them seriously and then once they get behind they start picking up their intensity, start physically man handling our weak players and grind the Sabres into submission.

or 

It could be that our team’s flaws get exposed over the 60 minutes, especially our poor defense and penalty kill.  The defense and PK get exploited time and again as the game progresses destroying the hope created by the quick start.

or 

It could be a mix of all these issues.  

Well ya, it's all those things. They generally don't handle adversity well and that's the youth and lack of veteran leadership at the core. So beginning of the game no adversity, other team napping, then their coaches wake them up sometimes. 

The team is playing better right now and they are doing things they should have been doing for years now. Going to the net, pushing back, being physical at times. But where was this in the first half of the year? The teams that are in the hunt have been playing like this for a lot longer and thus they are far ahead. It's Adams failure all the way. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

6 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I think it is bigger than one player. Watch the 5 on 3 Anaheim PP at the start of the 1st. 5 on 3 is tough, obviously, but Tuch was playing far too high. Cross ice passes between the forward and D on an 5 on 3 PP should be very hard to make. I just don’t recall seeing a team defend a 5 on 3 like that. 

Your McLeod hill is a strange one to me. Nobody is saying he is a star. He has undeniably been an effective player though. There was speculation earlier this year that the Sabres and Penguins were looking at swapping a young NHL ready player (players?) for Rust. I think Rust, McLeod, Tuch, would be one of the league’s fastest lines and could easily be a good 2nd line on a playoff team. 

My issue with McLeod is that he is incredibly inconsistent and always has been.   If you look at his season he had 12 pts (6g) in the first 18 games and then disappeared for 22 games (0g, 6a) and then got hot again with 12 pts (8g) in the last 13 games.  Now add that he's never been a good playmaker.  This year he is having a career year (on a contract year).  Unfortunately setting himself up for a big payday at the Sabres' expense.  The key here is his 24% shooting % for a guy with a career shooting % in Edm of 11.9%.  His scoring is not sustainable.  If Adams give him a long-term deal or even a Mitts type 3 year deal, we will come to regret it.   

As a 3rd line center he is perfectly ok given his solid 5 on 5 defense and speed.  We just can't overpay on a career year and we still must find a top 6 playmaker.

[_Q_]

19 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Why are you reluctant to categorize Tage as a 1C? It seems to me that a JJP/Tage/Tuch with other variations at wing is a solid one line. The bigger issue is how is the second line going to be constructed. I would put Cozens at wing on the second line and go from there. I would prefer acquiring a quality 2C from the market but not sure that is a reasonable expectation. 

I agree with this.  

 

A center spine of Tage-Kulich-McLeod-Krebs looks ok for now.

if you can add a 2C and bounce Kulich to wing and one of Helenus/Östlund develop.  Now things look pretty good.  Especially if Cozens can excel at wing.

[mjd1001]

20 minutes ago, _Q_ said:

I agree with this.  

 

A center spine of Tage-Kulich-McLeod-Krebs looks ok for now.

if you can add a 2C and bounce Kulich to wing and one of Helenus/Östlund develop.  Now things look pretty good.  Especially if Cozens can excel at wing.

When healthy, Tage is a bit of a unicorn.  He's one of the few players in the NHL that other teams really have to game plan around.  He can play center, and recently we saw some games where he is productive at wing.   So what do I think all this means?  You don't really need a traditional "first line center" if Tage is on the first line, and healthy. He can play Center, or you can put someone else and center and put him at Wing, and the line will succeed.

Now, that doesn't mean take a borderline AHL player and throw him there and things will be fine. You want to have a good player there. But I think he allows you, again when healthy, to play him at center or play him at wing with a 'good' other player at Center and the line will be fine.

This team is in more need of a good, quality, productive, 2-way guys at Center #2 and #3.  I like the 2/3 season of McLeod so far, lets see if they extend him and if he can be what he has been long term.

Edited 5 hours ago by mjd1001

[LGR4GM]

48 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

My issue with McLeod is that he is incredibly inconsistent and always has been.   If you look at his season he had 12 pts (6g) in the first 18 games and then disappeared for 22 games (0g, 6a) and then got hot again with 12 pts (8g) in the last 13 games.  Now add that he's never been a good playmaker.  This year he is having a career year (on a contract year).  Unfortunately setting himself up for a big payday at the Sabres' expense.  The key here is his 24% shooting % for a guy with a career shooting % in Edm of 11.9%.  His scoring is not sustainable.  If Adams give him a long-term deal or even a Mitts type 3 year deal, we will come to regret it.   

As a 3rd line center he is perfectly ok given his solid 5 on 5 defense and speed.  We just can't overpay on a career year and we still must find a top 6 playmaker.

He's better than Cozens so far. 

[mjd1001]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

He's better than Cozens so far. 

The thing with McLeod is, he doesn't have games where he kills the team.

He may vanish for periods of time offensively, but so does Cozens.  But when McLeod isn't scoring, he's not often hurting you. Thats not the same with Cozens through this year and most of his career.

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

He's better than Cozens so far. 

Which is a pretty sad commentary on Cozens. 

Are you willing to pay $6 mill a year for McLeod given his 24% shooting %?

[Archie Lee]

10 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Which is a pretty sad commentary on Cozens. 

Are you willing to pay $6 mill a year for McLeod given his 24% shooting %?

AFP is projecting 3x a little more than $3 million.  I think it will be higher than that.  I don't think anyone is giving McLeod $6 million a year.

[GASabresIUFAN]

4 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

AFP is projecting 3x a little more than $3 million.  I think it will be higher than that.  I don't think anyone is giving McLeod $6 million a year.

If he puts up 50 pts this season, no way he settles on a 3 mill per season deal.  AFP estimates were also based on his stats while he was in the midst of his 6 pts in 22 game slump. 

Edited 4 hours ago by GASabresIUFAN