Are there major changes coming this summer and who will make them?

[SABRES 0311]

KA will be here this summer.

[In The Buff]

I cant help but think that i wish we still had Cozens. Not so much for what he brings on the ice, but simply to still have him as a potential trade piece for someone who could actually be useful.

KA trading Cozens for Norris, a player who costs more & doesn't play at all, has seemingly put us in a worse position. At least before you could still trade Cozens. Wtf are we going to do with Norris if this is par for the course for him (which given his injury history it has been)?

I just don't understand why KA thought taking on this much risk was a wise idea. Surely there was an option available that wasn't as much of one?

So on 1 hand I'd like to see major changes but at the same time, change for the sake of change isn't always a good thing... in fact it could make your situation worse... like this Norris deal is looking like right now.

I pray Option #3 is what takes place, as it all starts at the top & unless we improve there, we'll likely not improve elsewhere.

[bunomatic]

2 minutes ago, In The Buff said:

I cant help but think that i wish we still had Cozens. Not so much for what he brings on the ice, but simply to still have him as a potential trade piece for someone who could actually be useful.

KA trading Cozens for Norris, a player who costs more & doesn't play at all, has seemingly put us in a worse position. At least before you could still trade Cozens. Wtf are we going to do with Norris if this is par for the course for him (which given his injury history it has been)?

I just don't understand why KA thought taking on this much risk was a wise idea. Surely there was an option available that wasn't as much of one?

So on 1 hand I'd like to see major changes but at the same time, change for the sake of change isn't always a good thing... in fact it could make your situation worse... like this Norris deal is looking like right now.

I pray Option #3 is what takes place, as it all starts at the top & unless we improve there, we'll likely not improve elsewhere.

🤷🏻‍♂️boggles the mind but I suppose KA thought the injuries would magically disappear. My magic 8 ball told me the day of the trade that this would haunt us. 

[Pimlach]

23 hours ago, Stoner said:

Guelli will save us. He will convince Terry that although major management/coaching changes won't likely change the short term trajectory of the franchise, they will rejuvenate the fan base. After all, this is supposed to be entertainment, not a study in hockey management theory that needs x seasons for results to be valid.

You seem to think Guelli has more clout than most of us do.  

[PerreaultForever]

Tank for McKenna. 

I'm kidding.

Or am I?

 

[Crusader1969]

This could be nothing or could be something.  If you check Jarmo Kekalainen's X account.  He is following beat writers from 3 teams

1) Columbus Blue Jackets

2) Cleveland Monsters

3) Buffalo Sabres 

[Archie Lee]

12 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

This could be nothing or could be something.  If you check Jarmo Kekalainen's X account.  He is following beat writers from 3 teams

1) Columbus Blue Jackets

2) Cleveland Monsters

3) Buffalo Sabres 

At this point, I would be fine with Jarmo, I guess. Barring something unexpected, he is pretty much the best available option with experience. There isn’t much in his track record to get excited about, though. Except, of course, that his teams made the playoffs 40-45% of the time. His track record is pretty mediocre. I think coach selection would be key for any hope of a quick rise in the standings. His post-Tortorella choices were not inspiring. 

[SabreFinn]

3 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

At this point, I would be fine with Jarmo, I guess. Barring something unexpected, he is pretty much the best available option with experience. There isn’t much in his track record to get excited about, though. Except, of course, that his teams made the playoffs 40-45% of the time. His track record is pretty mediocre. I think coach selection would be key for any hope of a quick rise in the standings. His post-Tortorella choices were not inspiring. 

As it seems Kekäläinen drafted well, and he had no trouble with palm trees and he sure could get a trade done. I think his failures in choosing coaches is why I still don't want him despite that. 

[Drag0nDan]

22 hours ago, In The Buff said:

I cant help but think that i wish we still had Cozens. Not so much for what he brings on the ice, but simply to still have him as a potential trade piece for someone who could actually be useful.

KA trading Cozens for Norris, a player who costs more & doesn't play at all, has seemingly put us in a worse position. At least before you could still trade Cozens. Wtf are we going to do with Norris if this is par for the course for him (which given his injury history it has been)?

I just don't understand why KA thought taking on this much risk was a wise idea. Surely there was an option available that wasn't as much of one?

So on 1 hand I'd like to see major changes but at the same time, change for the sake of change isn't always a good thing... in fact it could make your situation worse... like this Norris deal is looking like right now.

I pray Option #3 is what takes place, as it all starts at the top & unless we improve there, we'll likely not improve elsewhere.

I don't think Bernard-docker is going to light the world on fire by any means, but he's probably the best RHD in the organization now.  By far the best RHD from an upside perspective, as cliftons at his ceiling and it's... not great.

From a trade chip perspective you have:

Byram - RFA - LHD when we have too many, top 5 pick pedigree, probably would score more with PP time.  

Power - already extended LHD, top overall pick, still working on his game.  He'd probably net more than byram in a trade, but i don't see how you keep both with Dahlin running PP1.  

Tuch - 1 year remaining on his deal, and its very affordable.  Would be a target of pretty much anyone in the league.

Norris - Fairly large contract, but he's a center who can shoot.  He was probably hurt when we got here, and they're either being careful because we suck and there's no point in re-injury, or they don't want him to be hurt during the offseason.

JJP - RFA - Probably the biggest chip, steadily improving point totals and passes the eye test.  Moving him would want to net a really good return.  

Quinn - RFA - Worst season of his career and also struggled to stay healthy at times.  Skating and conditioning haven't been great, and he's just not a physical puck battler.  If you move him you're likely getting little in return, or a bad contract for a decent player. 

Rosen - Winger whos approaching 200 games in the AHL, and will be 23 next season.  Either move him, or move someone above and put him on the ice.  Another year in the AHL and he's pretty much jost.  

Östlund - Still learning the NA game, former first rounder, not sure how much value he has, i'd put it at less than the pick he was used for though.  

I don't expect them to move all of these players.  The team needs a 1C (especially if you want to continue using thompson on the wing), and players who can help keep the puck out of the net.  They have a number of RFAs and 22M in cap space on the projected cap.  If they extended byram, JJP, Quinn, levi, and bernard docker they would still likely have a good amount of space to play in free agency as well. 

I do think 2 of the players above move and byram seems like the likely candidate over power.  I'm just not sure who the trade targets could be that improve the team today.  The team really needs to hit on a big free agent.

[PerreaultForever]

Given that the current on ice roster seems to have found some chemistry and Quinn has shown signs of actually being useful my new thought is to trade Norris in the off season. He's a big trade chip and could get a potential return.

imo we have enough offense as is (and we have offensive prospects). What we need for real lasting success is a proven NHL goalie and a top 4 defensive D man. Add those 2 ingredients at any cost and we might actually have something. 

I'd try to upgrade Lafferty as well but that's a minor issue and not game changing to say the least. 

[Porous Five Hole]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Given that the current on ice roster seems to have found some chemistry and Quinn has shown signs of actually being useful my new thought is to trade Norris in the off season. He's a big trade chip and could get a potential return.

imo we have enough offense as is (and we have offensive prospects). What we need for real lasting success is a proven NHL goalie and a top 4 defensive D man. Add those 2 ingredients at any cost and we might actually have something. 

I'd try to upgrade Lafferty as well but that's a minor issue and not game changing to say the least. 

I am thinking both special teams PP/PK via coaching is a logical way to improve (5 on 5 scoring is already a team strength), but Norris can help with that and he’s already here. We moved for him for the dead weight of Dylan. Great trade.

It will be difficult to do more with less. I would roll with Norris and improve in other ways (like trading Byram for different defensive help). 

[GASabresIUFAN]

@Thorner and I finally agreed that Natural Stat Trick was using empty net situations in their EV calculation which IMHO is wrong.  
 

The Sabres are +3 differential at EV (5 on 5, 4 on 4 & 3 on 3) (175 gf/172 ga).  Our 169 5 on 5 goals is 3rd most in the NHL and our 175 EV goals are also 3rd.  EV scoring is not our issue.   EV goaltending and defense is a huge issue.  We have allowed the 8th most goals against at EV.  

The Sabres are -45 when short handed (53 ga & 8  shgf)  (7th worst net PK)

The Sabres are +31 on the PP (39 for with 8 shorties allowed) (8th worst net PP)

The Sabres are also - 10 in empty net situations ( 6 on 5 or 5 on 6) (19gf vs 29ga), although 22 of the 29 have been empty net goals scored against while we had our goalie pulled.  Clearly we are having trouble keeping in zone offensive possession when trying for goals when behind late in games.  

Where this team sucks is on special teams.  We also take too many penalties (224 times short handed 4th most in the NHL) while only drawing 213 Power Plays.

Also our goaltending has been significantly below league average in save % 5 on 5 and on special teams.    
 

Solutions

1. Fire all the coaches.  The EV offense improved year over year, but everything else still stinks or regressed.

2. Add better D and goalies.  This should help the PK and EV defense.

[Thorner]

7 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

@Thorner and I finally agreed that Natural Stat Trick was using empty net situations in their EV calculation which IMHO is wrong.  
 

The Sabres are +3 differential at EV (5 on 5, 4 on 4 & 3 on 3) (175 gf/172 ga).  Our 169 5 on 5 goals is 3rd most in the NHL and our 175 EV goals are also 3rd.  EV scoring is not our issue.   EV goaltending and defense is a huge issue.  We have allowed the 8th most goals against at EV.  

The Sabres are -45 when short handed (53 ga & 8  shgf)  (7th worst net PK)

The Sabres are +31 on the PP (39 for with 8 shorties allowed) (8th worst net PP)

The Sabres are also - 10 in empty net situations ( 6 on 5 or 5 on 6) (19gf vs 29ga), although 22 of the 29 have been empty net goals scored against while we had our goalie pulled.  Clearly we are having trouble keeping in zone offensive possession when trying for goals when behind late in games.  

Where this team sucks is on special teams.  We also take too many penalties (224 times short handed 4th most in the NHL) while only drawing 213 Power Plays.

Also our goaltending has been significantly below league average in save % 5 on 5 and on special teams.    
 

Solutions

1. Fire all the coaches.  The EV offense improved year over year, but everything else still stinks or regressed.

2. Add better D and goalies.  This should help the PK and EV defense.

It’s still an issue. Being like 17th (instead of 19th. But still 19th depending on the calculation method) in even strength differential is not close to “good enough, worry about the rest”

*Stanley cup* contenders add forwards, dude 

its 15th in 5v5 differential. It’s nothing to write home about. 

19 hours ago, Thorner said:

It’s also about consciously raising the bar. The fascination with things being “ok” is not just odd it actively prevents the goals from being achieved. Are we not tired of rosters that “could” make it? Make one that “could” finish top 10: so when we fall short inevitably due to unforeseen circumstances that arise every year, we still make the playoffs 

is the goal to make the playoffs, or give us a chance to make the playoffs? The UTTER lack of urgency blows my mind. It’s like with goalies where no one seems to think it’s ok to expect them to make some saves that are “above the line”. There’s no rule your goalie just has to be average and the rest of the team has to pick up the slack. Any component of the roster can be improved to help facilitate a playoff berth 

we were “no stone unturned” two years ago.

the sabres are like 15th in ES differential , not first. It’s *conceivably* good enough to be a playoff team. We aren’t close to maxed out there lol. A goal added is still as valuable as one prevented: we aren’t close to a situation where we’d “lose value” from having too many scorers 

it’s so fascinating - people will argue BPA for the draft regardless of composition but can’t envision the roster in the same terms. *the sabres are not close to* being at the critical mass, anywhere 

 

19 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

This bothers me a ton. The Sabres mantra is just "we should sneak into the playoffs" as opposed to "let's win the GD league"

- - - 

I’ll never agree with your, “aim really low, complain a lot when it goes wrong”‘ strategy 

Edited 6 hours ago by Thorner

[inkman]

Sadly, I think the Bryson signing is a reflection that Kevyn is running it back.  I doubt there are major changes unless he’s fired.