MattPie

It might be a leap. Normally, if someone said to me, "well, we do things a little differently here" I would assume they think their way is superior.

It's this sentence. Not hard to read that as negative to Buffalo.

The board is ready for the off-season.

I'd think some combo of the NHLPA and NHL Cap Hyenas don't want GMs implying that they're going to sit someone who is ready to play. The Sabres are not Vegas, after all. Even more likely they don't want to say "no way" and leave a little room just in case.

First Name Car. From the planet Pande, so Pandean. Peasy, easy.

First post.

I think the Sabres can lose two and still hit 95 points, which would be pretty safe.

Well, yes. He's a professional hockey player, you know.

No thanks; do you have any idea what he'd do with ready access to Ted's, Seneca Texas Hosts, and Zweigles? (I know it's a low-blow, I don't care)

Hold on there: NHL All-Star Zemgus certainly bumps the trade value some.

You rang?

I think most people moving to the City of Buffalo (I should have spelled that out, my mistake) aren't in the "Taxation is theft" crowd. Not as many people are talking about moving to the Buffalo suburbs. It seems like a number of people that are moving because they can get the metropolitan life they want with out the cost of living in a large city.

Brawndo's comment is more researched, but anecdotally I see a lot of people on Reddit and other places moving to Buffalo. It's regularly listed as a good place to live and inexpensive compared to other cities that the people that dream of owning a home can actually do it.

And win at bare minimum 7 or 8 of those 10. Otherwise it's pointless. Prepare thyself for failure. Sabres are 6-4-0 in the last 10. That's a nice playoff 5-8 seed level of play, but nowhere near good enough to make up for the rest of the season. If the Sabres made the playoffs this season, we'd be talking about it years later because of how unlikely it is. Kinda like that Colorado team that went 23-2 or something to finish the season a bunch of years ago.

True. They can go 7-2-1, 7-2-1, and then 2-2-0 instead of 3-1-0 and hit 92. 🙂

Oh, it's possible they go 7-2-1 per 20 for 1/4 of a season. But just so unlikely it's not worth having hope. Re "WSH is on a 91 point pace, etc.". Every year people say this, and yet, every year the cut-off is higher than that. Every team in the hunt is going to pick things up in the last few weeks of the season, especially against teams that sold off at the trade deadline and are just playing out the season. 0.750 might get us it, nothing less unless it's an odd year.

I didn't care enough to run the numbers, but I'm sure we're in "need to be the best team in hockey for the rest of the season to get to mid-90s points" neighborhood. It doesn't matter how many points back of team X, but there are like 6 teams all in the same boat and it only takes one other team to make a run too. OK, can't resist: 58 points in 58 games today. Let's say 94 points (although 96 is more sure). Getting 36 points in the remaining 24 games, a nice even 1.5 points per game, or 0.750 point%, is 94 points. That's very close to the 2005-2006 Red Wings, which had the 7th best NHL season in history. No team in the league is over 0.700 right now.

I like this surly chz thing that's going on.

The only tough part about the trades is being 50 and working outside on job site with 30 years of hard miles on the clock. Initially they make a lot of sense.

EDIT: I don't know what got me a thumbs-down, so I whole-heartedly say: I had no malicious intent and I'm sorry.

Y'all kinda sound like entitled customers. I'd be damned if I'd go salute a bunch of people that have been booing me for the last three hours. It's funny, we all love stories when some customer throws a tantrum, demands to have someone fired, and they get schooled. If you don't like the product, don't go. To be fair, a few hundred people is half the crowd.

I was going to answer, but Marvin's is better. AI will kinda throw stuff out there that kinda works for general cases, but you need to be careful about QA on the code. It reminds me of how a friend described the initial wave of offshoring manufacturing to the far east. You cut costs on creation, but you better be on your A game with test and QA processes. Especially at the time, the far east would just kinda ship it and it was up to you to make sure it met the requirements. AI is no different; it doesn't actually understand or care about your problem, it just creates something that looks like the way someone else solved it. You and me both. I might have a move left in the next couple years if I have to, but there are certainly people that aren't going to look twice at an IT resume going back to the 90s. I am lucky that my current gig is doing AI infrastructure, so I have a certain amount of leverage there.

Dude, that sucks. I've been there. I hope you make out OK.

Yep, time for "Buffalo Bills 2024 - This is our year!"