I would slide Greenway down so we can get rid of Girgs. Think that third line wing will be the prospect tryout spot (Probably Savoie).
Roster Thread (2023-2024 Season)
- Thread starter MOGlLNY
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Dubi Doo
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2008
- 20,672
- 14,819
Well, they certainly have to assets to pull it off. Im not sure Adams views a top-4 defender as a need, unfortunately. It'd be great if he did. While I <3 Sammy- he's becoming difficult to count on to stay healthy. Even when he is playing, it seems like he's dealing with something that hinders him. I'm intrigued with what he can do with Power or Byram, at least.
I do think we'll see some similar additions to the center core. If I remember correctly, that's an area Adamd mentioned they would address, and I doubt/hope he doesn't want to continue to wait for Krebs to take that role. They NEED those role players in the top-6.
This is the offseason to be super aggressive. I was fine with last season's acquisitions even though I was wrong with how'd they utilize Clifford. The lack of forward acquisitions did leave me underwhelmed in that area.
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
I'd rather have Girgs than a rookie who needs more development like we usually have. Savoie should not be gifted a spot and should be made to wait for an injury, like Boston, Colorado, and other successful teams would do.
Concussions are the weirdest things to come back from you feel discombobulated and hazy motor skills get affected and processing the game and decision making is off but he seems to have returned to form and due to his skillset he was able to remain effective as a 2 way center
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
Why are you defaulting to assuming he's earned anything? That's called gifting. When you've only played in juniors against teenagers, "earning" is being the first call-up after injury
zenthusiast
cybersabre his prophet
- Oct 20, 2009
- 19,565
- 7,258
joshjull
Registered User
Keep Girgs or get a similar vet to replace him if he leaves.
No interested in holding a spot for one of the kids to make the team. I want experienced players to fill out the starting 12 going into camp. If a kid can force their way onto the roster, great
I think he’s talking about a competion for a spot left open for one of the youngsters. As opposed to just handing one of them the spot.
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
Yes because there was no competition. Who did he beat out? Rousek, Biro, or Murray, who arguably will never be NHL-caliber players?
joshjull
Registered User
I’ve always been curious what that “great vision” opinion many had at the time was based on. He’s a player who made a ton of high risk/low reward passes that usually led to turnovers, bad ones at that. But every once in a while he would get lucky and the pass went through. It was usually a beauty. Then many on here or Sabres twitter would go on about his amazing vision. They seemed to have missed the tons of mistakes before that.
Someone who sees the ice really well isn't going to consistently f*** up as much as Krebs does.
As for his 4th line role, he put himself there. His constant turnovers and poor decision making led the coaches to essentially put him with babysitters (Girgs/Okposo). Those two play straight line hockey. It forced Krebs to break out of his habits to play with them. He eventually became effective between them. Unfortunately every time he gets back with more skilled guys His old habits have a tendency to creep back in.
I’m expecting this front office to count on him as one of our centers next season. So I’m cheering for him to figure it out. So I hope its just immaturity in his game thats the problem.
Ace
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2015
- 26,335
- 33,105
Everyone always talks about “handing” out spots and never considers the other side of that. When they are beholden to below average vets because they already paid them. Johnson played all year as the worst D in the league. It’s one of many reasons they’re stuck in the mud.
He beat out more than half the forwards who also made the team. He was no worse than their 6th best forward option heading into this season. You want to say he didn’t earn it because they didn’t have seven better options?
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
That's gifting one of them a spot, instead of making them earn it by outplaying an NHL-caliber player imo. We shouldn't be holding spots open for anyone who has less than 10 NHL games. At least not anymore. That's a recipe for missing the playoffs.
There are enough injuries throughout the year that all of the youngsters would end up getting a chance to steal a spot from a vet. That's how model teams do it and how we should think about starting to do it. And that chance would come early and often...no need to artificially accelerate it by not filling out your roster (again).
Ace
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2015
- 26,335
- 33,105
I want to go back to this seriously because it is really something.
He didn’t beat out Olofsson? That’s what you’re going with? That Benson in camp didn’t earn a spot on this roster because you’ve narrowed who he competed with down to AHL guys…when he played over Olofsson, or at least in a bigger role, and his big contract the whole season?
joshjull
Registered User
I agree with you about not leaving a spot open in the first place. As I previously posted, I want vets to fill out any openings in starting 12 heading into camp.
But If three youngsters like Savoie, Kulich and Rosen are competing for one roster spot (as an example). Then whoever gets it wasn’t gifted it. Regardless if the spot was held for one of them to win. It’s kind of silly to argue otherwise.
CaliSabresfan24
Registered User
The you tube video was from his first year with the Sabres/Amerks and the twitter post was from this year.
A lot of nice passes and setting players up for great chances but you're right the, kid can be a turnover machine. What is the success rate on his passes? I got no idea but there's the evidence of the great vision I'm talking about.
As for his future here, I am not too sure. I wouldn't be upset either way if they move on from him or not. Him not being here isn't going to be detrimental since we have a plethora of young centers in the pipeline.
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
Not a single one of them should have been penciled in to the lineup for the season. It's literally the reason the season is over. All he had to do it beat out other kids and scrubs who don't even belong in the NHL, which wouldn't be the case with any other team.
The bar for all 31 other teams is higher than it is in Buffalo. We gift spots to kids every year.
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
Leaving a spot open to a kid who has never played in the NHL is what I call "gifting." I don't care if you think it's silly -- I'm not surprised your making a big issue about which word I use because there is no topic small enough for you to argue ad nauseum. It must be tiring.
Regardless of what word you'd use, it's something no other team would do and is a big reason for the continued failure.
It wasn't a lineup spot for the season, it was Quinns lineup spot to fill in until he returned from injury, so it was supposed to be at most a 3mo fill in, nobody would have predicted Quinn going down with a 2nd injury.
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
Quinn was hurt in the offseason and was slated to miss half the season, so I don't subscribe to this logic. Again, this is the type of thinking that leads to losing. Winning teams would have fortified instead of letting Benson waltz in and take the spot as an 18 year old.
this is kind of a dual edged question.
He had a great camp, and he showed he can play in the NHL.
But that being said, while he passed the eye test in his first 9 games, he didn't pass the production test. 1 G, 4 A in 9 games isn't enough to 'force yourself' onto the roster.
he scored 1 highlight goal in game 8 or 9 and they kept him.
There was really no reason not to return him to junior at that point other than 'shiny new toy' syndrome that Adams seems to get from every 1st round pick.
He still could learn from Junior and he'd have more time to physically add muscle that he needs. Burning a year of his ELC to have him underwhelm offensively for extended stretches just simply isn't worth it for his development or the Sabres progression as a team.
In the end, this is another failed example of 'lets the kids play' from the Adams regime. We had cap space and picks to add a forward last summer to help the team, especially in light of Quinns injury. Even more so if you look at the 7M spend on Girgensons/okposo/Jost.
Benson was good, but he didn't make enough of an impact to justify the burned year of ELC and not having a veteran to support the kids already on the roster grow and develop.
This is one of those times where actually watching the guy play is going to let you down in this argument. He certainly did produce territorial with Greenway and Mittelstadt where that line was pushing possession into the other zone and handling defensive responsibilities. His game has been disruptive to other team's all year. It isn't just the point production that makes him a worthwhile addition to the roster. This treatise is bunk because you are basing it on scoring without any viewings. I know you don't like it when I say this, but you have to watch the games.
- Aug 19, 2005
- 16,828
- 5,740
So, I'm not disagreeing with your premise about his contributions. Benson clearly showed he has the ability to be a NHL forward now. (and I watched much more this year than previous years)
What I am saying is, what he brought at this point in his career wasn't worth burning a ELC year for. One of the most valuable things in the NHL is productive players on their ELC contracts. We would have been much better off paying a NHL veteran to fill the role Benson had and let him go back to junior.
A full year in Junior and he can go to the AHL next year. (he would have completed the 4 full seasons in the CHL eligibility requirement so he would be AHL elgible next year). I believe also he would be elgible for a slide year next year in the AHL, meaning he could have 3 full years of ELC NHL Play starting at the age of 20 rather than 18.
Benson he was good....but in the long view of things, it would have been much more advantageous to send him back to junior and give him a year in the AHL next year.
- Aug 19, 2005
- 16,828
- 5,740
Use whatever word you want, but to imply that Zack Benson did not earn his roster spot and exceed everyone's reasonable expectations as an 18 year old is just bizarre. If this roster matched his passion and tenacity we'd be gearing up for a playoff series for this first time in 13 years. Zack wasn't a gift, he was a revelation.
- Status
