Taro T

So w/ Luchencko going, we're finally on the clock?

It also wounds heels. 😉

Yep. My bad. It was the Kulich pick. D'oh!

Thought the Florida pick was used on Rosen. (Can't use the strike through while on the phone for some reason, but no it was the Kulich pick.)

We should hope not.

So, today & tomorrow, hockey fans league-wide will be saying "Heute, bin ich ein Sabre Fan" (or if they aren't standing with us, they at least get a small taste of what it's like being us). 😉

So, is that a 'yes' or a 'no'?

Would be more hopeful if it were someone other than Button talking about it. And, yeah it would help, but based on the lack of Sabre moves the past few days am not overly hopeful for something that big. (But snagging Kane in 3 days would still qualify as big, too.)

Dang. Seems a bunch of the vets there really like it there.

Wouldn't put it at surprised. Would say fearful we don't see a trade tomorrow and will be relieved if we do. Am certain he's trying to pull the trigger. Am hopeful he will. But until he does, GA's over the top criticism of him holds some degree of merit.

Would give up hope for the next 2 years. But 1 way or another, expect it's coming that next year.

But, if he is another Quinn (rather than another Skinner which was alleged by some earlier, which would be a whole different thing) is that actually a bad thing? Not seeing it as such personally. Would honestly love to have 3 Quinns. Could put one on each scoring line and would create match up nightmares somewhere for the opponents.

Interesting. Still see it as being possibly a precursor to another move where a prospect & a 2nd is a big part of the package. Didn't Forton say they saw pretty much a large tier of ~6 - 14 (15?)? If they see thise guys all having essentially the same value & likelihood to pan out AND they know they'll very likely trading a prospect then doesn't it make sense to still have essentially the same chance of replacing the prospect and get an extra 2nd?

Yep. Am hoping this move kills 2 birds - helps get an NHLer w/ the 2nd and gets them Jiricek. Is 14 too high to take him (expecting he'll be available)?

Levi and not sure between Cozens, Quinn, or Benson. (Depends on what's coming back on which one would be saddest to see leaving. And would definitely be sad if Peterka goes, but don't expect his ceiling (when their full 200' games are considered) is is as high as the other 3.)

They SHOULD be able to do it. Bring in say Kane and Danault or Eriksson Ek and the top 2 lines have to get game planned leaving the 3rd line with Skinner on it (were he actually staying; he isn't) to play the role of the RAV line back in '06.

No.

Of course, the last few times an ex-Sabre won the SC, at least 1 wore a letter here at some point: O'Reilly, Bogosian, Eichel, Okposo. Thus, it has to be Ruff. 😉 (Would guess Girgensons as a distant 2nd on the likelihood. 🙂 )

Collected as a kid, but when Topps stopped making cards for 2 years and did stickers instead, stopped collecting. Got back into it briefly when Upper Deck and Pro Set and Score and Bowman all joined the ranks but there were just too durn many to bother with it. Someday might start back up. Hope you have fun rekindling your youth.

Thompson is a Danny Briere sort of a C. He gets that title and he pretty much plays the role in the neutral and offensive zones but he gets help from a W when he's in his own end. Tuch ends up the low F inside the defensive zone often, much as Hecht did so when lined up next to Danny and the oft villified Ville Leino did so for Danny in Filly.

Wonder if their keeping the raised "mane" (that's what it would be called on a lion, not sure what it's called on a buffalo) that they've had since the 50th anniversary season. The closeup of the seamstress working on the sweater shows one, but the photo of the full sweater on the mannequin doesn't seem to have it. Hopefully they keep it. That feature really makes the logo 'pop.'

While that is the preferred reason for it that does make buying Skinner out make sense, there is one other reason it makes sense. Lindy Ruff might see keeping him on the team when he's trying to teach a young team how to play in its own end when he has about 12 years of examples of how Skinner is incapable of doing that for any but the briefest of stretches and Skinner is respected and liked by the young guys on the team might be counterproductive and actually detrimental to installing that lesson/ defensive system. And if it's going to cause the rest of the team to continue to be bad in their own end, he might see letting a guy that will score 20-35 goals on a 3rd line that is well liked go as a net positive even though it does cost the team 20-35 goals and a teammate that is liked in the room and is the favorite player of many fans (not this particular fan, but many nonetheless).

Yes. The team hasn't won because it has had subpar goaltending for the most part during his tenure and the team is too d*mn young. Also, and more importantly, Adams timeline has been geared towards '27 (MAYBE '26) since he convinced ownership to punt Eichel and THAT core. Am not happy that is the target date, but it sure seems to be the target for true contention and extended contention. And NO, wadr, do not agree that his timeline is always next year. He literally has said the true goal is to be a legit contender for the SC (and he's said it isn't to WIN the SC because there's too much luck involved even when you are the #1 contender to actually make that happen) and he's never set a date on that (the '27 mentioned above is from reading tea leaves). So, he has not said "next year" on that goal yet. He also literally said last year that playoffs were the expectation last year. That didn't happen and the coach was canned because of that. (But even with that, the goal wasn't playoffs, the goal is LT being a consistent SC contender. The expectation was playoffs, but that wasn't the goal. A minor, but important, distinction IMHO.) Do not know if he will turn out to be correct. Have in fact literally stated that often. But THAT doesn't change what his timeline certainly seems to be. (Btw, '27 isn't next year. It's the year after next year. 😉 )

How was he going to keep Reinhart? In a Covid-less world, he might very well have offered him a LT deal coming out of Covid, rather than the 1 year deal that walked him to 1 year shy of UFA status (Ullmark too); but we live in a world that got thrown for a major loop due to Covid. The owners, while still billionaires, expected they were going to have cashflow issues (as most of their wealth was tied up in assets (which btw at the time were hemorrhaging value) which were not particularly liquid and were not handing out any multiyear deals to players. (Maybe there were some on the Bills side, but don't recall any ottomh there either.) Reinhart was 1 year from UFA, he was NOT going to reup with the Sabres (at that point both he and Eichel (who was on a LT deal) both were wanting to get out). Getting Levi and a 1st was salvaging something in a year that he expected the team to be bad and ALSO worked towards that '26 or '27 Dahlinesque timeline target of being truly competitive. Reinhart will be 2 years older by then, his timeline was not (and is not) the same as the one Adams sure seems to be working towards. As for Mittelstadt, Adams is on record as having been trying to land another top 4 D-man (and particularly a partner for Dahlin) for at least 2 seasons. Byram fits the Dahlin timeline almost to a T. Mittelstadt, while still being in his prime 2 years from now works with that timeline, Adams already has Thompson (who is beyond the timeline) and Cozens (who's right in it) with Savoie, Kulich, and Östlund available to be in that '27 window and filling the 2nd C slot by then (as Tage slides either to W or 3C by then). As you are well aware a D-man's timeline is further out than a F's timeline. No data. Certainly hope not. But wouldn't blame him if he does in that case. And, expect that if Dahlin asks out, Adams is officially cooked and the experiment ends.

Because we (here on this board) use English as our primary language and don't all feel the reflexive need to bow to everything Francophile and remove the 's' off words that typically have them associated with them. It's still Labatt's to some of us, gosh durn it. (Or, for Fearless Leader, it's still offsides to some of us.) 😉