tom webster

It’s funny, I was going to use “forest for the trees” earlier but images of a young Linda Ronstadt clouded my brain.

I believe in people’s perception being their reality so obviously “unreasonable” was a poor choice of words given the response it generated. I in no way meant to insult anyone or belittle their feelings. If it makes anyone feel better I decided to attend my first game in a month tonight so it feels like punishment is being served.

I asked a question, I gave some history, thought I’d start a conversation. I was proposing it might be unreasonable given the history but I don’t believe anywhere I said it was. There was a time when that lead to serious give and take. I was one at the beginning of the year that expected more. I was guy at last year’s trade deadline slamming the table trying to explain that development isn’t linear and you should go for it when you can.

I posed a question. I never said anything about being unreasonable to disagree, I doubled down by playing devil’s advocate but I certainly never said I was not frustrated, quite the contrary. I think it’s a reasonable argument and I’m not surprised it’s gotten such a angry response but I am surprised by some of those who seem infuriated. Have a great day everyone.

What historical data?

See I am in complete agreement with this only that I think if it wasn’t for the nine years prior to then we would be willing to give them a mulligan for this year. And for the record, to some of those up thread, I never said I was happy with the last couple of years. I do think, however, that history shows that we might have been expecting something that’s rarely if ever done given the current framework under which everyone operates.

They have hardly been the league punching bag the last couple of years and of course loosing isn’t acceptable but the question is that given the available historical data is it reasonable to expect that anyone can turn any franchise around in four years? Like you and the original poster said, it took the Mets 8 years. Thanks for proving my point.

The point is that no one in similar circumstances has come up with a faster plan. Vegas was an anamoly that will likely never be repeated.

Playing Devil’s advocate, they did all that and all except LA, are still either behind or on par with the Sabres and I wouldn’t bet against that being the case next year. Buffalo, Detroit and New Jersey are the real test case because all three are on roughly the same timeline and all three have issues to overcome. For the record, I agree in the assistants.

I don’t disagree with any of this. The point I was clumsily trying to make is that it hasn’t been as easy as some have implied to pass what was and has been the standard bearers for the last four years. I expected more this year and believe there were opportunities to speed up the process. I also believe they deserve one more year.

I don’t follow baseball as closely as I did but I thought it had started to move in this direction.

You all owe this to LabattBlue, one of my favorite posters by the way. I asked a question in a couple of different threads. Are we holding KA and DG responsible for the 9 years before they were put in charge instead of just the four years or so they have been here. Blue responded like the other poster with the usual, it's the NHL, 'everyone makes the playoffs." "parity" reigns, so on and so forth. Today I had lunch with someone with an educated opinion so I started in on the discussion at which point he smiled and talked about how he's been pushing this story to people he perceived had the time to do the kind of research this topic probably needs. Anyway, here is the abridged version. After tearing down the whole organization, KA kept Ralph to start the 56 game, 20/21 season before replacing him with DG ezactly half way between the 56 games. Out of the 16 teams that made the playoffs that year, 7 have made the playoffs all four years since then. 3 of them have made it three of the four years and three more have made it the last three years. That leaves you with four teams who made the playoffs once in these four year and two likely to this year; 1) Montreal - a true anamoly 2) Calgary - a team on a rise set back byTkaczuk and other contract issues 3) Seattle - went all in on year two but now have taken a major step back 4) New Jersey - considered a year ahead of Buffalo last year, they too have taken a step back 5) Philly - a "Torts" surge likely to last this year but no excuses, they continue to win. 6) Vancouver - they've been out of the playoffs since 2014/2015 I believe Further, Out of the bottom ten teams from KA's first year; Six are behind Buffalo this year LA has become a perenial playoff team but where well on their way when Buffalo started the rebuild. New Jersey made it last year. Detroit may this year. I know, I know, It still sucks, none of this matters and we are all tired of waiting but the truth is, its not like all the other organizations are passing them by. They are holding their own, have the youngest roster in the NHL, apparently a boatload of prospects and other teams are nearing the end of their run, except Boston who somehow never rettreats. Like it or not, they can make a good case for earning another year. Fire away.

Maybe I worded it wrong but what I meant is that most people in general have grown up believing unprovable facts are absolute because that’s the way it’s always been. I allow for the possibility you are right, I just doubt anything that is regarded “as the only way.” Also, for the record, this has nothing to do with life in the Sabre bubble, quite the opposite in fact. In a perfect world, they agree with you. Lastly, at 64, I don’t take anything personal and I don’t mean anything personal. I enjoy that back and forth. Sorry if I offended you.

I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me how a talented rookie learns anything from skating around the Brett Murray’s and other AHL pylons and scoring goals from the blue line against goalies who can’t move laterally. Yes, I would wager the opposite. Let me know if you discover that alternative universe. Sticking with the QB theme, I’m guessing Josh Allen didn’t gain anything from watching Peterman throw five first half interceptions.

I’m not sure that’s true but that is old school thinking so you might be right. I think the difference between Benson and Kulich and Rosen is that Bensin’s game is mature enough for the NHL and then putting on weight and years, things he’ll do without playing in the AHL, there is nothing he could have learned from the AHL experience.

You can get all the data you want but there’s no way of knowing player A became a better player than player B because team Y kept player A in the minors three years while team X made player B play in the NHl right away. You believe that because that’s what you were taught your whole life along with other great truisms like rookie QB’s can’t play in the NFL. I don’t because I learned to question everything. My belief is that player A was just the better player all along but team Y had no room on its NHL roster.

Good teams, which usually get undo credit for player development, leave players in the minors three years because they have no room for them in their lineup. I’m of the camp that doesn’t believe Benson should be in minors. NFL teams have realized that rookie QB’s can start immediately. In the NHL it’s a little different because of age but if they can handle the physical part of the game, slowly teams will realize that nothing is gained by playing in the AHL.

I think they are better than the current rules. Kickoffs had become a non event. Either removing them completely or tweaking them was the only option

There really is no way to know. i believe that “development” or lack thereof, is just an excuse when someone doesn’t turn out like was expected. The player blames the team. The scout blames the team. The fan who was sure Luke Adam was the next Phil Esposito blames the team, etc.

As I’ve stated before, there is no real way to prove the point unless you were able to create an alternate universe. Would player A turn out any different if he was drafted by another team? How can you ever know?

Casey is a perfect example of how the whole “development” thing is bunk. As you said, all players have different development curves. Good players figure it out or grow into or whatever. The whole notion that you can ruin a player by putting him in bad situations has always been old school garbage to me.

Everytime I see a highlight of him it screams Briere. I am interested to see how he develops.

Granted, not an acronym in any sense of the word. I apologize for the lack of clarity.

Rod Brind’ Amour. Carolina has still not extended him and there have been rumors that Buffalo would offer to make him the highest paid coach in the NHL. First, he’s likely to stay. Second, like Babcock before him, his wife would likely veto any move to Buffalo.

I don’t see Adams getting fired. He really is good organizationally and is ideally suited to be President with Karmonis taking over as GM. In an ideal world that would happen this year along with RBM taking over as highest paid coach in the league but there are a few reasons that won’t happen