nfreeman

I liked the first few episodes of We Own this City, and they were reminiscent of the Wire, but the next few were much worse IMHO. Just way too preachy and not interesting or entertaining. Separately: - The Northman -- pretty bad - Bullet Train -- dumb but entertaining

I think DG has, correctly, and unlike Krueger, realized that moving Skinner off of the top line or the top PP unit results in Skinner getting PO'd and/or discouraged, with a net negative effect on the team. This is where I am. It's also worth noting IMHO that the PP has been in the dumper for a few weeks now, so a tweak is in order. And VO is crushing it right now.

Demko is under contract for 3 more seasons after this one at $5MM per year. Comrie has 1 more year at $1.8MM, while UPL has 1 more year at $837K. Demko turns 28 in December. Demko has been Van's #1 for 2 full seasons -- the abbreviated 20-21 season, in which he started 35 games, and last season, in which he started 64 games. In both of those seasons, he had a .915 SV%, which is very good, especially considering the high-pressure and fairly dysfunctional environment he worked in. All of which is to say that I agree that he fits the profile. And getting him wouldn't necessarily dissuade Levi from signing, since presumably UPL would be shipped out, Anderson will retire and Comrie only has 1 year left on his deal. I'd guess the Canucks would want UPL coming back, plus picks/prospects. I wouldn't expect KA to give up his 2023 #1, but maybe the best #2, plus Rosen or Östlund? OTOH, the guys might feel like UPL is a core member of the group and has gotten them to the threshold of the playoffs, so this might be a bad chemistry move.

Well, if Cozens, Muel and TT are full go in practice, they are probably playing tomorrow night.

Awesome.

Like @Marvin, this is where it gets too rich for my blood. I don't like the idea of 2 $9MM wingers. And the more costly item is the inflationary impact of giving an outsider, say, $9.25MM per year. That would drive up the AAV for Cozens, Dahlin, etc.

I think unless they think Savoie is going to be at least as effective in the NHL next year as JJP and Quinn are this year, they will not want to use a roster slot and burn a year of his ELC. NB that this is Quinn's and JJP's D+3 season, while next year will be Savoie's D+2 season. This is interesting. I wonder what the effect on his ELC would be? I'd guess it would burn a year, as it would be a pro league, but maybe not.

I'm out on Davis as the #2 for sure. Happy to keep him as the #4 (assuming Diggs at #1, another "boundary" wideout at #2 and Shakir in the slot at #3, with Davis playing in 4-wide sets). But Diggs needs a big monster with speed to play opposite him on every play, and that guy needs to be much better than Davis. Davis had the opportunity to be that guy this year and didn't come close to delivering IMHO.

The Bills have to get another legit WR this summer, probably in the first round of the draft.

That was an incredible performance by Mahomes last night. He's still the best player in the NFL IMHO.

BTW, I find it interesting that "primer" rhymes with "Zimmer," not with "timer."

KC is getting about a million times more pressure on Burrow than the Bills produced.

So, do we all think that cozens and Samuelsson should sit out Wednesday’s game against Carolina, which would give them something like a solid 2 1/2 weeks of rest before their next game, which is two weeks from yesterday? Does anyone think they should play? Interested to hear your rationale if so.

BTW, and I'm sure this has already been said upthread: that was a fantastic goal by Quinn.

Well, Vegas lost again last night, bringing them to 2-8 in their last 10. This loss was to the Islanders, who had lost 10 of their last 12 before playing Vegas. Vegas went 0-3 on its NYC-area visit, losing to NJ, the Rangers and the Islanders.

Yes — this was by far the worst thing about ties IMHO. Maybe not from the start of the game, but most teams played for the tie for most of the 3rd period. It stifled the play and made the games so GD boring.

Good stuff here. I wonder If Eichel ever wonders what would’ve happened if he’d had DG as his coach. I wonder about it.

This is all reasonable, but the ROR trade story was written much more quickly, and with much more finality, than the story of the Eichel trade. What if this is by far Tuch’s best season, and Krebs never amounts to more than an energetic fourth liner, and Östlund washes out? Those questions will play out over the next three or four years, as will Jack’s story. While you’re probably right that the Sabres had to trade Eichel, as there was too much water under the bridge, we don’t know for sure that this is the best package they could’ve gotten (although I think it probably was). The better Eichel does going forward, the more pronounced the question will be of whether they should’ve got more for him. More generally, from the Sabres’ perspective, in evaluating the trade, I don’t think it’s realistic to say that there is no difference between Eichel turning into, say, an Auston Mathews level player, as opposed to, say, Pierre Luc Dubois.

Well, for the record, that's not what you said. You said this: ...i.e. that I don't want to see him still playing and playing well at 34/35 -- which is not the case and which is what I objected to. Regardless, the reformulated question about whether I'd prefer to see him prove himself as a top-5 player is admittedly a tough one and kinda pins me down, which is of course the point of spirited discourse like this. I suppose I think that if he is or turns into a good guy and good teammate, I'm fine with him turning into that kind of player, although in that case the evaluation of the trade from the Sabres' perspective would suffer. If he's a demonstrable jerk, though, it would be hard to be happy with him being a fantastic player. Was this confirmed? I thought he was just a space cadet and injury-prone -- I didn't realize he had a substance abuse problem.

This is all fine except the bolded -- I don't wish ill on Jack, and I don't think you should assume, or state, otherwise about me or anyone else who hasn't specifically indicated otherwise. If he has personal failings, which, again, we don't really know, I hope he improves on them and either way I hope he has a good career and a good life. My underlying motivation in all this is to evaluate the Eichel trade. IMHO, to do so, a realistic evaluation of Eichel's current status and overall career is required.

I think Mario and Dominik are close and I could go either way on calling them generational. I'd include Mike Bossy in their category -- as a goal-scorer, he was either generational or pretty GD close IMHO. I don't disagree that Eichel's development track was reasonable, but I do disagree with your view that "8 years" is meaningless/unfair. It's reasonable IMHO as a fan of a team that invested so much in him to want to evaluate his career as a whole -- and, as you've admitted, he's fallen off of the "elite" track in the last 3 years. We can point to Covid, injury, etc., but it all counts, including frequency of injury, adapting to new/bizarre covid circumstances, trade, new coaches, new teammates -- whatever. It all counts and it's all part of his (8-year) body of work. Also, for the record, Jack will turn 27 at the start of next season. I think it's pretty reasonable, if not generous, to assume that after this season his career will be half over. Will that give him a solid 5 years or so in which he very well could prove himself elite again? Absolutely, and I wouldn't be a-tall surprised if he gets there. But after another 8 seasons, he'll be 34 and about to start his age-35 season. It's pretty unlikely that he'll be elite at that point, and reasonably likely, given his injury history, that he'll be broken down and finished or close to it.

I recommend a morning or afternoon strolling around old San Juan, including lunch or brunch. It's really nice and the closest thing to an old European city in the Caribbean IMHO, if you enjoy that sort of thing. Sure seems that way -- but maybe not if he warmed up today?

This is fair and I totally agree that "generational" has become well overused. However, even if we scale expectations back to "elite" -- which I would say is in the ballpark of top-10 NHL player -- Jack has fallen well short of that standard other than in one of his 8 NHL seasons. That shortfall, plus injury frequency, plus DB behavior, plus suffering by comparison with Tuch/Krebs/Östlund/#2 pick equals "I'm glad KA made that move."

I don’t think anyone is giving up a #1 for McCabe, and I definitely don’t want the Sabres to do so.

Yes -- Tuch is a major, and almost unique, weapon on the forecheck. That, combined with very good puck skills (albeit not quite elite) and hockey IQ makes him a fixture on the top line for as long as he has his legs IMHO. We can go back and forth on 80 points, development track, etc. but the fact remains: for a guy who was supposed to be generational, Eichel has been a top-5 NHL player one out of his 8 seasons (and even that one was debatable, although not by me -- I thought he was awesome that year), and well outside the top 20 for the rest of them, including this year. The injuries are very relevant, both in the evaluation of Eichel's career and for that matter in the circumstances surrounding his trade, but either way they are an undeniable fact: he gets hurt a lot, and availability matters. What also matters is attitude. We don't know for sure, of course, but there were plenty of reports, for attribution, from guys close to the team like Hammy and Rivet that Jack was a major DB here. When he started playing for Vegas last year they immediately fell off the table and missed the playoffs, which was a pretty surprising and disappointing outcome. Now, after his return from yet another injury, his new coach in Vegas is publicly unhappy with him. BTW, they got dusted again tonight (in a game in which Jack was a minus-3 with zero points) and have now lost 7 of their last 9. In many cases, talent isn't nearly enough.