Roster thread: Get To Work (2022-2023 Season)

  • HFBoards is well aware that today is election day in the US. We ask respectfully to focus on hockey and not politics.
Status
Not open for further replies.

TehDoak

Chili that wants to be here
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
32,194
9,502
Will fix everything
It most certainly does. Acting like it doesn’t is blind allegiance to laundry. The players wearing it matters. None of the current bearers of the laundry have shown they can elevate above the bottom half of the league; and that with career years. Until they actually win consistently you don’t have a core, you have a a handful of maybes. It is time for this FO to shitcan this develop players bullshit and ice a winning effing team. They have made no decisions that have yielded tangible winning results. There is no long term in pro sports only what you have done this season. Anything else is pollyanna bs. Win. And do what you need to win again next year. You can’t assume organic growth, because if you do it applies to all teams equally and at the same rate. Everyone has the same odds of improving organically. Use what assets you accumulated while being the laughingstock of the league and ice a winning product. No excuses.

You aren't wrong. The issue is the team wasn't really purposefully built. Rather it's more of a collection of found parts. No major additions, roster shaping trades, etc. The closest you could find to actually addressing a need was the Greenway trade in the last 3 years.

Now, given that, and the fact that they are below the cap floor this year (and could be next year if they wanted to be), the results HAVE been good. However, it's much harder going from mediocre to good than it is from bad to mediocre. When you have a ton of issues and a lot of young players, it makes sense to wait and see what will be fixed internally than going out and spending on people. However, the fact that the needs list for this summer matches last summers, the "do nothing" decision from last summer has proven to be a costly one as addressing just one major need last year would have likely led to the end of the playoff drought. Instead, we opted for a cheap band aid approach.

This summer has to be different. The problems are clear. The assets are there. The cap space is there. We've punted enough seasons away.
 

CowbellConray

Registered User
Sep 8, 2010
2,495
1,608
You aren't wrong. The issue is the team wasn't really purposefully built. Rather it's more of a collection of found parts. No major additions, roster shaping trades, etc. The closest you could find to actually addressing a need was the Greenway trade in the last 3 years.

Now, given that, and the fact that they are below the cap floor this year (and could be next year if they wanted to be), the results HAVE been good. However, it's much harder going from mediocre to good than it is from bad to mediocre. When you have a ton of issues and a lot of young players, it makes sense to wait and see what will be fixed internally than going out and spending on people. However, the fact that the needs list for this summer matches last summers, the "do nothing" decision from last summer has proven to be a costly one as addressing just one major need last year would have likely led to the end of the playoff drought. Instead, we opted for a cheap band aid approach.

This summer has to be different. The problems are clear. The assets are there. The cap space is there. We've punted enough seasons away.
I think there was a purpose to the way the team was built, they just didn’t want to commit any long term resources to a very specific vision because there wasn’t enough to go off it yet validating a particular model.

They spent just to the cap floor, but you can see Adams wants two way hard working players with speed. Tuch, Krebs, Jost are all quick players with the ability to play two way. They picked Savoie and Ostlund as well for their two way abilities. Quinn and Peterka have a lot to learn, but you can see why Cozens and Mitts have been given bigger roles over the last season.

On the back end, they want to get more defensively stout. Bringing in Stillman and Boosh. They know they have two prime offensive weapons on the D, but they want others that can eat dzone starts and bottom 4 minutes.

Just because they don’t dish out olayers we aren’t fans of doesn’t mean the team isn’t purposefully built. But you can tell they do want to evaluate young talent and I wouldn’t be surprised if we continue to see an effort to insulate our young guys with two way talent
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
155,340
109,204
Tarnation
Olofsson, Bryson to Pens for Petry. Sabres can retain on Olofsson. Have to think the Pens are going to reload vs rebuild, so getting two players for one helps. Olofsson is a potential 30 goal scorer for the Pens. We was basically that for the Sabres with limited ice time.

UPL to Seattle for Borgen. Leverage Botterill a bit.

In both these deals, tweek and even out as needed. These are just the base ideas.

Sabres would basically rebuild their back end.

Samuelsson - Dahlin
Power - Petry
Stillman - Borgen
x Lyubushkin

The move Jokiharju.

Some of it will be who takes over in Pittsburgh, but there is no way they're taking that return for Petry.

Unrelated, tuned in to the Vaxjo Lakers game again and wondering if they could pull Haman Aktell for the 3rd LD spot next year.
 

MOGlLNY

Registered User
Jan 5, 2008
12,310
12,561
I think everybody is now in sync that we know exactly what needs to be addressed and there’s no more “evaluation year” excuse. Time to push.

Last year I believe it was a bit different, most were willing to let Adams have the year. And I do believe it benefited us, we have a much more clear idea of what moves out and in need to be made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chainshot

Ehran

Registered User
Sponsor
Feb 2, 2019
4,224
4,165
Texas
Is it a lost art or a pointless one? Getting shots through matters much more than how hard the shot is.
Agreed, in general. A harder shot is much more difficult for a goalie to handle, and would produce more rebounds, you would think. And rebounds more than goal scoring seems to be the intent of most shots from the point.
 

Der Jaeger

Generational EBUG
Feb 14, 2009
18,114
14,944
Cair Paravel
Some of it will be who takes over in Pittsburgh, but there is no way they're taking that return for Petry.

Unrelated, tuned in to the Vaxjo Lakers game again and wondering if they could pull Haman Aktell for the 3rd LD spot next year.
Idk. Olofsson isn’t nobody. He’s just not a good fit in Buffalo. He’s got 30 goals to offer a team and a great shot on the PP. that’s not a small trading chip.
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
155,340
109,204
Tarnation
Agreed, in general. A harder shot is much more difficult for a goalie to handle, and would produce more rebounds, you would think. And rebounds more than goal scoring seems to be the intent of most shots from the point.

They're easier to block and disrupt, per the league data.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad