What do we really have here?
 

I'm kicking myself right now.

I was going to post this yesterday night, didn't, and woke up to Howard Simon and Jeremy White talking about it on WGR this morning.

What are our Sabres? Since Myers came in, our team has been essentially the same. Sure, we have different players in some spots, but talent-wise and at our core, we're pretty much the same team we were last season.

So, what kind of team are we? Are we the team that started off last season on fire in route to a 100 point season and a division title, the team that we've seen in 2011 that looks like it can play with anyone?

Or are we the team that seemed to go into neutral last year before bowing out quickly in the playoffs, the team that started off poorly this season?

Finally (and this is the easy answer), are we just plain streaky? Are we still waiting for guys to mature?

I can't decide whether we're bad, good or somewhere in between. Thoughts?

Too much?

We're good, but I want to see how they do in the playoffs this year if they make it before I honestly label them.

I'm always optimistic, tho, so...

I thought they would be great this year, but they started off the season terrible. At this point, you have to give the team a lot of credit. We're missing our most consistent scorer and number one center. Center has always been a weakness for us, so when we lost Roy, I was finally starting to doubt this team. They have, since January, become one of the hottest teams in the NHL. They are 8-4 against playoff teams since January. They have a deep- but- inconsistent offense.

Next year they should take the next step. If Regier is going for a big name player, adding him (The player) to a core of Vanek-Miller-Pommers- Stafford- Ennis- Myers- Kassian- and so on, should give us an exciting team to watch.

We'll have to wait and see how they do in the playoffs to really get a grasp of this team. They're going to play a tough team; this is known, but if they can take it to 7 games, and show signs of fight; then I'll be content with our core.

The defense is extremely young, but players like Weber, Myers, and Sekera should atleast be on the upswing of their careers right now. We've seen the inexperience of our 'D', and I think that played a major role in their horrible start.

The offense is a question mark, but Players like Stafford and Vanek can control a game. Contract year or not, there aren't many players with the goalscoring abilities that Stafford has. Pommers is one of those players who won't dominate a game, but he's a great top 6 forward who can produce at a high level if he has enough talent around him. The young gun Ennis should produce more next year, as sophmore slumps seem to effect defenseman more than wingers.

Right now...If the roster was exactly the same next year, I could see us finishing 4th or 5th, but if we add a top-line center, we're gonna be good, real good. Especially if Myers can con't playing how he has been lately.

What kind of team do we have here?

Mostly mediocre players (not all). That's not gonna get it done to win Lord Stanley's Cup. I hope this summer we unload 3-5 mediocre players.

Nieds, Connolly, and Grier will all be gone by next season...there ya go.

We've always had a good young core, we've just never built around it properly. Roy, Vanek, Pominville, Stafford, Gaustad and Miller would all be better players today if they had the right guys around them IMO (like having a legitimate top 6 forward to play with our top forwards instead of a guy like MacArthur/Paille/Ryan/Kennedy just filling the 5th and 6th top forward spots, Miller having a better back-up, etc...).

Now our core is getting older and becoming veterans, so maybe the experience is just making them better players.

Same thing we've had for the past few seasons. A decent core who can claw their ways into the playoffs but probably don't have what it takes to get a cup.

I think it's a solid base for Pegula / unchained Darcy to work with, though.

We have an average team that might barely make the playoffs and will most likely not advance beyond the first round. It's been that way the past 4 years.

In other words, we're mediocre.

They don't have the classic example for Cup winning teams:

- Norris-type or high-level shutdown defenseman
- Very good, timely goaltender
- At least two high-level centers
- A Selke-type shutdown checker
- One dominant scoring winger
- PP Catalyst (often a defenseman)
- Size and depth

They might have the first with Myers. They have the second with Miller -- his playoff outings have been very good when they get there. They have a gaping hole in the middle in part due to Roy's knee injury and in part due to a relative lack of bodies. They have the scoring off the wing, perhaps more than they need, and it could be argued that Hecht could, could be the checking assignment guy. But that's a relatively weak comparison. They don't have the PP catalyst and they don't have a lot of size and it doesn't look like right now that they have the sort of 1-7 defense to win over the longer haul in the playoffs.

Clearly, the old roster philosophy of being just good enough to get in and then PRAY will take time to adjust.

I think the recent upswing can be mostly attributed to maturity. Lots of guys rising to the occasion when in years past they would have just rolled over and died. It's a promising sign, and hopefully it rubs off on guys like Ennis, Gerbe, and Weber.

Since the departures of Briere, Drury, McKee, Dumont, etc etc, this team has desperately lacked a veteran presence in the locker room. The young guys have had to figure a lot of things out on their own, but it looks like they're finally putting it all together. It's too bad it couldn't have came a year earlier d:

There is also a level of accountability that hasn't been there in the past -- the guy who bought the team is not only involved, he's there, travelling with them. Enthusiasm is great. So too is holding someone (including oneself) to account.

What others have said. A solid competitive core. I think we're a few pieces away from being serious contenders.

Those pieces are a top 6 center a top2 impact d-man and a solid reliable backup goalie.

One of those will be filled next year with Enroth being the full time backup.

I agree with much of this, but I would make the case to amend portion II.g) to consider a combined effort of Leopold (unit 1), and Myers/Ennis (piggyback to form Master Blaster on unit 2) as reasonable powerplay catalyst. And I temper this contention somewhat; they meet the definition of powerplay catalyst in the same way the Sabres currently qualify for the playoffs: just barely.

Yeah, that's right.


(RJ): Myers and Ennis piggyback to form Master Blaster and it's one-nothing Buffalo on the POWerplaaay!

WAT..

@
thread title ....



we have failure to communicate, some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it ....

Ha! I was thinking the exact thing.

They are an average team that looks to develop into a good one, IMO.

When Myers , Ennis , and hopefully Kassian hit their prime this team will be scary under Pegula.

We have a team that's in 8th place (by 1 point). We have a team with the same core players that missed the playoffs in 08-09 and that got eliminated in 6 games last year. It's exciting that the team is playing so well, but we need to have some perspective (myself included).

The Sabres are an average team. If it wasn't for the OT victories they'd be sitting in 11th place (assuming all regulation ties resulted in 1 point).

BOS 82 pts
PHI 81 pts
WAS 75 pts
PIT 74 pts
MON 73 pts
TAM 69 pts
NYR 64 pts
CAR 62 pts
FLA 62 pts
TOR 61 pts
BUF 60 pts
NYD 56 pts
OTT 55 pts
ATL 54 pts
NYI 51 pts

a failure to communicate?

edit: Buck wins

Late to the party ....


:D

What's you measurement? Taking away the Sabres' 5 points from shootout victories they'd have 67 points :confused:

Sorry, brother. I mistyped. I meant OT victories. I suppose I should have used shootout wins.

you should have just written the article, "myers is the best draft prospect for this city since jim kelly". Now pay the man.